1
Adoni-Ţedec, împăratul Ierusalimului, a aflat că Iosua pusese mâna pe Ai şi o nimicise cu desăvârşire, că făcuse cetăţii Ai şi împăratului ei cum făcuse Ierihonului şi împăratului lui, şi că locuitorii Gabaonului făcuseră pace cu Israel şi erau în mijlocul lor.
2
Atunci i-a fost foarte mare frică; fiindcă Gabaon era o cetate mare ca una din cetăţile împărăteşti, mai mare chiar decât Ai, şi toţi bărbaţii ei erau viteji.
3
Adoni-Ţedec, împăratul Ierusalimului, a trimes să spună lui Hoham, împăratul Hebronului, lui Piream, împăratul Iarmutului, lui Iafia, împăratul Lachisului, şi lui Debir, împăratul Eglonului:
4
,,Suiţi-vă la mine, şi ajutăţi-mă, ca să batem Gabaonul, căci a făcut pace cu Iosua şi cu copiii lui Israel``.
5
Cei cinci împăraţi ai Amoriţilor: împăratul Ierusalimului, împăratul Hebronului, împăratul Iarmutului, împăratul Lachisului, şi împăratul Eglonului, s-au adunat astfel şi s-au suit împreună cu toate oştile lor; au venit şi au tăbărât lângă Gabaon, şi au început să lupte împotriva lui.
6
Oamenii din Gabaon au trimes să spună lui Iosua, în tabăra din Ghilgal: ,,Nu părăsi pe robii tăi, suie-te la noi în grabă, izbăveşte-ne, dă-ne ajutor; căci toţi împăraţii Amoriţilor, cari locuiesc pe munte, s-au strâns împotriva noastră``.
7
Iosua s-a suit din Ghilgal, el şi toţi oamenii de război cu el, şi toţi cei viteji.
8
Domnul a zis lui Iosua: ,,Nu te teme de ei, căci îi dau în mânile tale, şi niciunul din ei nu va putea să stea împotriva ta``.
9
Iosua a venit fără veste peste ei, după ce a mers toată noaptea dela Ghilgal.
10
Domnul i-a pus în învălmăşeală dinaintea lui Israel; şi Israel le-a pricinuit o mare înfrângere la Gabaon, i-a urmărit pe drumul care suie la Bet-Horon, şi i-a bătut până la Azeca şi până la Macheda.
11
Pe când fugeau ei dinaintea lui Israel, şi se pogorau din Bet-Horon, Domnul a făcut să cadă din cer peste ei nişte pietre mari până la Azeca, şi au perit; cei ce au murit de pietrele grindinei au fost mai mulţi decât cei ucişi cu sabia de copiii lui Israel.
12
Atunci Iosua a vorbit Domnului, în ziua când a dat Domnul pe Amoriţi în mânile copiilor lui Israel, şi a zis în faţa lui Israel: ,,Opreşte-te, soare, asupra Gabaonului, Şi tu, lună, asupra văii Aialonului!``
13
Şi soarele s-a oprit, şi luna şi-a întrerupt mersul, Până ce poporul şi-a răzbunat pe vrăjmaşii lui. Lucrul acesta nu este scris oare în Cartea Dreptului? Soarele s-a oprit în mijlocul cerului, şi nu s-a grăbit să apună, aproape o zi întreagă.
14
N-a mai fost nici o zi ca aceea, nici înainte nici după aceea, când Domnul să fi ascultat glasul unui om; căci Domnul lupta pentru Israel.
15
Şi Iosua şi tot Israelul împreună cu el, s-a întors în tabără la Ghigal.
16
Cei cinci împăraţi au fugit, şi s-au ascuns într-o peşteră la Macheda.
17
S-a spus lucrul acesta lui Iosua, zicând: ,,Cei cinci împăraţi se află ascunşi într-o peşteră la Macheda``.
18
Iosua a zis: ,,Prăvăliţi nişte petre mari la intrarea peşterii, şi puneţi nişte oameni să-i păzească.
19
Şi voi nu vă opriţi, ci urmăriţi pe vrăjmaşii voştri, şi bateţi-i pe dinapoi; nu-i lăsaţi să intre în cetăţile lor, căci Domnul, Dumnezeul vostru, i-a dat în mânile voastre.``
20
După ce Iosua şi copiii lui Israel le-au pricinuit o foarte mare înfrângere, şi i-au bătut cu desăvârşire, ceice au putut scăpa au intrat în cetăţile întărite,
21
şi tot poporul s-a întors liniştit în tabără la Iosua în Macheda, fără ca cineva să fi crâcnit cu limba lui împotriva copiilor lui Israel.
22
Iosua a zis atunci: ,,Deschideţi intrarea peşterii, scoateţi afară din ea pe cei cinci împăraţi, şi aduceţi-i la mine.``
23
Ei au făcut aşa, şi au adus la el pe cei cinci împăraţi, pe cari-i scoseseră din peşteră: pe împăratul Ierusalimului, pe împărtul Hebronului, pe împăratul Iarmutului, pe împăratul Lachisului, şi pe împăratul Eglonului.
24
După ce au adus pe aceşti împăraţi înaintea lui Iosua, Iosua a chemat pe toţi bărbaţii lui Israel, şi a zis căpeteniilor oamenilor de război, cari merseseră cu el: ,,Apropiaţi-vă şi puneţi-vă picioarele pe grumajii împăraţilor acestora.`` Ei s-au apropiat, şi au pus picioarele pe grumajii lor.
25
Iosua le-a zis: ,,Nu vă temeţi şi nu vă spăimântaţi, ci întăriţi-vă şi îmbărbătaţi-vă, căci aşa va face Domnul tuturor vrăjmaşilor voştri împotriva cărora vă veţi lupta``.
26
După aceea, Iosua i-a lovit, şi i-a omorât; i-a spânzurat de cinci copaci, şi au rămas spânzuraţi de copaci până seara.
27
Pela apusul soarelui, Iosua a poruncit să-i pogoare din copaci, i-au aruncat în peştera în care se ascunseseră, şi au pus la intrarea peşterii nişte pietre mari, cari au rămas acolo până în ziua de azi.
28
Iosua a luat Macheda chiar în ziua aceea, şi a trecut-o prin ascuţişul săbiei; a nimicit cu desăvârşire pe împărat, cetatea şi pe toţi cei ce se aflau în ea; n-a lăsat să scape niciunul, şi împăratului din Macheda i-a făcut cum făcuse împăratului Ierihonului.
29
Iosua, şi tot Israelul împreună cu el, a trecut din Macheda la Libna, şi a dat luptă împotriva Libnei.
30
Domnul a dat-o şi pe ea, împreună cu împăratul ei, în mânile lui Israel, şi a trecut-o prin ascuţişul săbiei, pe ea şi pe toţi ceice se găseau în ea; n-a lăsat să scape niciunul, şi a făcut împăratului ei cum făcuse împăratului Ierihonului.
31
Iosua, şi tot Israelul împreună cu el, a trecut din Libna în Lachis, a tăbărât înaintea ei, şi a început lupta împotriva ei.
32
Domnul a dat cetatea Lachis în mânile lui Israel, care a luat-o a doua zi, şi a trecut-o prin ascuţişul săbiei, pe ea şi pe toţi cei ce se aflau în ea, cum făcuse cu Libna.
33
Atunci Horam, împăratul Ghezerului, s-a suit ca să dea ajutor Lachisului. Iosua l-a bătut, pe el şi pe poporul lui, fără să lase pe cineva să scape.
34
Iosua, şi tot Israelul împreună cu el, a trecut din Lachis la Eglon; au tăbărât înaintea ei, şi au început lupta.
35
Au luat-o în aceeaş zi, şi au trecut-o prin ascuţişul săbiei, pe ea şi pe toţi ceice se aflau în ea; Iosua a nimicit-o cu desăvârşire chiar în ziua aceea, cum făcuse cu Lachis.
36
Iosua, şi tot Israelul împreună cu el, s-a suit din Eglon la Hebron, şi au început lupta împotriva lui.
37
L-au luat, şi l-au trecut prin ascuţişul săbiei, pe el, pe împăratul lui, toate cetăţile cari ţineau de el, şi pe toţi ceice se aflau în el; Iosua n-a lăsat pe niciunul să scape, cum făcuse cu Eglonul, şi l-a nimicit cu desăvârşire împreună cu toţi ceice se aflau în el.
38
Iosua, şi tot Israelul împreună cu el, s-a îndreptat împotriva Debirului, şi a început lupta împotriva lui.
39
L-a luat, pe el, pe împăratul lui, şi toate cetăţile cari ţineau de el; le-au trecut prin ascuţişul săbiei, şi au nimicit cu desăvârşire pe toţi cei ce se aflau în ele, fără să lase să scape vreunul; Iosua a făcut Debirului şi împăratului lui cum făcuse Hebronului şi cum făcuse Libnei şi împăratului ei.
40
Iosua a bătut astfel toată ţara, muntele, partea de miazăzi, câmpia şi costişele, şi a bătut pe toţi împăraţii; n-a lăsat să scape nimeni, şi a nimicit cu desăvârşire tot ce avea suflare, cum poruncise Domnul, Dumnezeul lui Israel.
41
Iosua i-a bătut dela Cades-Barnea până la Gaza, a bătut toată ţara Gosen până la Gabaon.
42
Iosua a luat în acelaş timp pe toţi împăraţii aceia şi ţara lor, căci Domnul, Dumnezeul lui Israel, lupta pentru Israel.
43
Şi Iosua, şi tot Israelul împreună cu el, s-a întors în tabără la Ghilgal. Mare bătălie la apele Merom.
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":41085,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joshua","title_en":"Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","summary_en":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68711,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joshua","title_en":"Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","summary_en":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96337,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joshua","title_en":"Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","summary_en":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123963,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Joshua","title_en":"Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Joshua<\/h3>\n<p>Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership.<\/p>\n<p>Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immediately (Num 13:22–14:9), and as a result, of the twelve spies, only they entered Canaan (Num 14:30, 36-38).<\/p>\n<p>God directed Moses to designate Joshua as his successor (Num 27:15-23; Deut 34:9). After Moses died, Joshua led Israel across the Jordan River (Josh 1:1-18; 3:1–4:24) to the conquest of Jericho (6:1-27). When Israel suffered defeat at Ai, Joshua turned to the Lord and followed his instructions to purge Israel of sin (7:1-26); then Israel conquered Ai (8:1-29). Following God’s instructions to Moses (Deut 11:29-32; 27:1–28:68), Joshua built an altar on Mount Ebal (Josh 8:30-32) and read the blessings and curses of the covenant (8:33-35). Joshua conducted campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings, a southern and a northern coalition (10:1-43; 11:1-15). Joshua’s victories in these campaigns opened the hill country to settlement by the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p>After supervising the allotment of territories to the tribes of Israel, Joshua received his own portion in the land of Ephraim (19:49-50). He established the cities of refuge (20:1-9) and the Levitical cities (ch 21:1-45) and released the 2½ tribes that had settled east of the Jordan River to return home (22:1-9). As he grew old, Joshua charged Israel to remain faithful to God (23:1–24:28). His farewell message at Shechem summarized God’s dealings with Israel and concluded with the familiar challenge, “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15). Joshua died at the age of 110 and was buried in Timnath-serah (Josh 24:29-30; Judg 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua demonstrated exceptional faithfulness throughout his life, except in dealing with the Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27), when he neglected to consult the Lord regarding a decision. Israel served God faithfully under Joshua and the elders Joshua trained (Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7). Stephen mentions Joshua in his martyr’s sermon (Acts 7:45), and the writer of Hebrews uses Joshua’s conquest of Jericho as an illustration of faith (Heb 11:30). It is fitting that Joshua and Jesus are the same name in Hebrew: Joshua led Israel into physical salvation in Canaan; Jesus leads all who believe in him into eternal salvation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 17:8-15; Num 13:1–14:38; 27:15-23; 34:17; Deut 34:9; Josh 1:1-18; 4:1–24:33; Judg 2:6-9; Heb 11:30<\/p>","summary_ro":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","summary_en":"Joshua Joshua, son of Nun, was Moses’ assistant and successor as Israel’s leader. Joshua brought the young nation across the Jordan River into the Promised Land of Canaan, faithfully following God’s leadership. Before Israel reached Mount Sinai, Joshua led Israel’s warriors when Amalek attacked Israel (Exod 17:8-13). Shortly thereafter, he was among the twelve men Moses sent to scout the Promised Land (Num 13:1-16). Against popular opinion, Joshua and Caleb urged Israel to occupy Canaan immed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":608,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adoni-Bezek","title_en":"Adoni-Bezek","content_ro":"<h3>ADONI-BEZEK<\/h3>\n<p>Title of the Canaanite king of Bezek, a city in northern Palestine. Soon after Joshua’s death, the tribes of Judah and Simeon defeated Adoni-bezek and amputated his thumbs and big toes. Adoni-bezek himself had treated many captured kings that way, so he regarded his fate as divine retribution (Jgs 1:5-7). Some have suggested that he and Adoni-zedek (Jos 10:1) were the same person.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADONI-BEZEK<\/h3>\n<p>Title of the Canaanite king of Bezek, a city in northern Palestine. Soon after Joshua’s death, the tribes of Judah and Simeon defeated Adoni-bezek and amputated his thumbs and big toes. Adoni-bezek himself had treated many captured kings that way, so he regarded his fate as divine retribution (Jgs 1:5-7). Some have suggested that he and Adoni-zedek (Jos 10:1) were the same person.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADONI-BEZEK Title of the Canaanite king of Bezek, a city in northern Palestine. Soon after Joshua’s death, the tribes of Judah and Simeon defeated Adoni-bezek and amputated his thumbs and big toes. Adoni-bezek himself had treated many captured kings that way, so he regarded his fate as divine retribution (Jgs 1:5-7). Some have suggested that he and Adoni-zedek (Jos 10:1) were the same person.","summary_en":"ADONI-BEZEK Title of the Canaanite king of Bezek, a city in northern Palestine. Soon after Joshua’s death, the tribes of Judah and Simeon defeated Adoni-bezek and amputated his thumbs and big toes. Adoni-bezek himself had treated many captured kings that way, so he regarded his fate as divine retribution (Jgs 1:5-7). Some have suggested that he and Adoni-zedek (Jos 10:1) were the same person.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":628,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adoni-Zedek","title_en":"Adoni-Zedek","content_ro":"<h3>ADONI-ZEDEK<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADONI-ZEDEK<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADONI-ZEDEK Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27). See also Conquest and Allotment of the Land.","summary_en":"ADONI-ZEDEK Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27). See also Conquest and Allotment of the Land.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":984,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ai","title_en":"Ai","content_ro":"<h3>AI<\/h3>\n<p>Canaanite city that was settled before the time of Abraham (Gn 12:8; 13:3). The name suggests a “ruin” of special significance or striking appearance. The inhabitants of Ai, as well as those of other Canaanite cities (Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem), did not hinder Abraham in his meanderings in the hill country throughout the land. Abraham may have met with representatives of those cities and convinced their kings of his peaceful intentions. Or he may have presented such a strong front with his sizable entourage that he forestalled any Canaanite move against him.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel, led by Joshua, entered Canaan, the Promised Land, with the intention of ridding it of its former occupants and claiming it as their inheritance. Ai, the second city to face them, withstood the first Israelite attack against it. After dealing with Achan, a disobedient soldier whose taking of booty from Jericho had caused their defeat, the Israelites attacked Ai a second time and defeated it (Jos 7:1–8:29). Joshua captured the king, executed him, and burned the city, leaving it a heap of ruins (Jos 10:1).<\/p>\n<p>Ai, rebuilt and reoccupied during the monarchy (under Saul, David, and Solomon), seems to have been known under several names. It was evidently called Ayyah, one of the villages of Ephraim (1 Chr 7:28); Aiath, a village through which Assyrian armies marched toward Jerusalem (Is 10:28); and Aija, a village occupied by Benjamin’s descendants during the exilic period (Neh 11:31).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AI<\/h3>\n<p>Canaanite city that was settled before the time of Abraham (Gn 12:8; 13:3). The name suggests a “ruin” of special significance or striking appearance. The inhabitants of Ai, as well as those of other Canaanite cities (Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem), did not hinder Abraham in his meanderings in the hill country throughout the land. Abraham may have met with representatives of those cities and convinced their kings of his peaceful intentions. Or he may have presented such a strong front with his sizable entourage that he forestalled any Canaanite move against him.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel, led by Joshua, entered Canaan, the Promised Land, with the intention of ridding it of its former occupants and claiming it as their inheritance. Ai, the second city to face them, withstood the first Israelite attack against it. After dealing with Achan, a disobedient soldier whose taking of booty from Jericho had caused their defeat, the Israelites attacked Ai a second time and defeated it (Jos 7:1–8:29). Joshua captured the king, executed him, and burned the city, leaving it a heap of ruins (Jos 10:1).<\/p>\n<p>Ai, rebuilt and reoccupied during the monarchy (under Saul, David, and Solomon), seems to have been known under several names. It was evidently called Ayyah, one of the villages of Ephraim (1 Chr 7:28); Aiath, a village through which Assyrian armies marched toward Jerusalem (Is 10:28); and Aija, a village occupied by Benjamin’s descendants during the exilic period (Neh 11:31).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AI Canaanite city that was settled before the time of Abraham (Gn 12:8; 13:3). The name suggests a “ruin” of special significance or striking appearance. The inhabitants of Ai, as well as those of other Canaanite cities (Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem), did not hinder Abraham in his meanderings in the hill country throughout the land. Abraham may have met with representatives of those cities and convinced their kings of his peaceful intentions. Or he may have presented such a strong front with hi...","summary_en":"AI Canaanite city that was settled before the time of Abraham (Gn 12:8; 13:3). The name suggests a “ruin” of special significance or striking appearance. The inhabitants of Ai, as well as those of other Canaanite cities (Shechem, Bethel, Jerusalem), did not hinder Abraham in his meanderings in the hill country throughout the land. Abraham may have met with representatives of those cities and convinced their kings of his peaceful intentions. Or he may have presented such a strong front with hi...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1417,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Amorites","title_en":"Amorites","content_ro":"<h3>AMORITES<\/h3>\n<p>Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called <em>Amurru<\/em> (translation of the Sumerian <em>Mar-tu<\/em>), perhaps named for a storm god. They overran the Sumerians and eventually most of Mesopotamia. The city of Mari, on the upper Euphrates River, fell to them about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; Eshunna a short time later; Babylon by 1830 <span>BC<\/span>; and finally Assur around 1750 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Farther to the west, Amorites had been in Palestine and Syria as early as the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Egyptian texts of the early part of the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> show that additional waves of Amorite nomads were entering Canaan at that time. Many of their names are similar to the Amorite names from upper Mesopotamia. In fact, many names from the Mari tablets are identical with or similar to names in the patriarchal accounts in Genesis. People named Jacob, Abraham, Levi, and Ishmael were known at Mari, and names similar to Gad and Dan have been found there. Benjamin was known as the name of a tribe. Nahor was found to be the name of a city near Haran. According to Genesis, Abraham lived in Haran many years before going to Canaan. Jacob spent 20 years there and married two women from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Amorites appear prominently in the OT as major obstacles to the occupation of Canaan (the Promised Land) by the Israelites after the exodus. Calling Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt, the Lord spoke of Canaan, then occupied by Amorites and others, as a good land (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, God promised to destroy those nations (Ex 23:23) and drive them out of the land (Ex 33:2). The Hebrew people were warned not to make covenants with any of them, to intermarry with them, or to tolerate their idol worship (Ex 34:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>Spies sent into the land found Amalekites in the south; Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the northern mountains and to the west of the Jordan River; and Canaanites by the sea and along the Jordan (Nm 13:25-29). At that time there were Amorites east of the Jordan as well (Nm 21:13).<\/p>\n<p>God had instructed Israel to go up from Horeb and conquer the mountain Amorites on the west side of the Jordan all the way to the Mediterranean Sea (Dt 1:7). When they arrived at Kadesh-barnea they were at the foot of those mountains (Dt 1:19-20). But the people murmured and complained that God had brought them from Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Amorites. From the spies’ reports, they pictured the Amorites as an awesome people, greater and taller than the Israelites (Dt 1:26-28). At first they refused to trust God enough to go in, so God told them to turn around and head back into the wilderness. Then they changed their minds, stubbornly attacked the Amorites against God’s command, and were badly beaten (Dt 1:34-44). Finally, after 38 additional years in the wilderness, the Israelites once again faced the Amorites, but this time on the east side of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:13). The Amorite king, Sihon, refused to let them pass through his land. The Israelites were drawn up at the Arnon River, which flows into the Dead Sea about two-thirds of the way up its eastern shore.<\/p>\n<p>Transjordan was controlled by two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. Israel had to face Sihon first. His city, Heshbon, lay due east of the north end of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:21-26). Sihon himself had taken this land from the Moabites. Moses knew of Sihon’s reputation and quoted a poem that boasted of Sihon’s victory over Moab (Nm 21:27-30). Nevertheless, the Israelites defeated Sihon and devastated his kingdom from Dibon, four miles (6.4 kilometers) north of the Arnon, to Medeba, seven miles (11.2 kilometers) south of Heshbon. King Og, farther to the north, received the same treatment (Nm 21:31-35). King Balak of Moab heard of the Israelite victories and was terrified (Nm 22:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the people that by relying on God’s promises they had taken all of the land of the Amorites east of the Jordan (Dt 2:24–3:10). The conquered territory was given to the tribes of Gad and Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Nm 32:33). Then, 40 years after the exodus began, Israel was standing on the east side of the Jordan, having dispossessed the two great Amorite nations there (Dt 1:1-4). But there were other Amorite kingdoms in the hills west of the Jordan, along with other nations (Dt 7:1-2). They were to be destroyed in the same way Sihon and Og had been defeated (Dt 31:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>So famous was the victory of Israel east of the Jordan that Rahab and others in Jericho, west of the Jordan, knew of it and were frightened (Jos 2:8-11). The Israelites crossed the Jordan and took Jericho but were defeated at the smaller city of Ai in the hill country west of Jericho. They immediately assumed that they would be wiped out by the Amorites in those hills (Jos 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites regained God’s favor, however, and defeated Ai. Their victory made an impression on the other kingdoms west of the Jordan in the hills, valleys, and coastlands up to Lebanon, who allied to fight Joshua (Jos 9:1-2). Gibeon, an Amorite city seven miles (11.2 kilometers) southwest of Ai, made peace with Israel, putting more fear in the hearts of the remaining kings (Jos 10:1-2). Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, was evidently the leader of the Amorite kings west of the Jordan (Jos 10:3). Jerusalem was only eight miles (12.8 kilometers) southeast of Gibeon. Adoni-zedek called together the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, all within 50 miles (80.4 kilometers) of Jerusalem, to fight against Gibeon and Joshua (Jos 10:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua came to Gibeon’s defense and routed the Amorites, chasing them to the northwest and southwest. The Lord fought for Israel, raining hailstones on the Amorites at Azekah, southwest of Gibeon, and causing the sun to stand still in order to provide a longer battle day (Jos 10:6-14).<\/p>\n<p>In the far north, Jabin, king of Hazor, rallied the Canaanites and remaining Amorites all the way north to Mt Hermon (Jos 11:1-5). But they too were overcome (Jos 11:10-23). Toward the end of Joshua’s career, he reminded the people that it was the Lord who had given them the land of the Amorites (Jos 24:1-18).<\/p>\n<p>After the occupation of Canaan by Israel, Amorites still present in the land chased Dan’s tribe into the mountains and continued to live near Aijalon, 17 miles (27.4 kilometers) west of Jerusalem. They still held the slopes toward the south end of the Dead Sea as well (Jgs 1:34-36). In the period of the judges, the Amorites and their gods posed a constant threat to Israel’s well-being (Jgs 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the period of the judges, relations between Israel and the Amorites improved (1 Sm 7:14). David continued to honor Joshua’s treaty with the Amorite remnant of Gibeon (2 Sm 21:2-6). Solomon conscripted his labor forces from the Amorites and other peoples still surviving from Israelite conquest (1 Kgs 9:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT treats the deliverance of the Amorites and their land into the hands of Israel as a great event comparable with the exodus itself, a victory to be remembered and celebrated (Pss 135:9-12; 136:13-26). If the people forgot, the Lord reminded them through his prophets (Am 2:9-10). Long after Sihon and Og had been defeated, the area east of the Jordan was still remembered as the land of “Sihon king of the Amorites” (1 Kgs 4:19). When the kings of Israel and Judah began to fail God, the memory of the Amorites provided a standard of comparison of evil. The Jews’ continuing fascination with idolatry led God to address Jerusalem, representing the Jewish people, through the prophet Ezekiel: “Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ez 16:45). In the biblical view, the Amorites stood for everything that is abominable in the sight of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AMORITES<\/h3>\n<p>Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called <em>Amurru<\/em> (translation of the Sumerian <em>Mar-tu<\/em>), perhaps named for a storm god. They overran the Sumerians and eventually most of Mesopotamia. The city of Mari, on the upper Euphrates River, fell to them about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; Eshunna a short time later; Babylon by 1830 <span>BC<\/span>; and finally Assur around 1750 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Farther to the west, Amorites had been in Palestine and Syria as early as the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Egyptian texts of the early part of the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> show that additional waves of Amorite nomads were entering Canaan at that time. Many of their names are similar to the Amorite names from upper Mesopotamia. In fact, many names from the Mari tablets are identical with or similar to names in the patriarchal accounts in Genesis. People named Jacob, Abraham, Levi, and Ishmael were known at Mari, and names similar to Gad and Dan have been found there. Benjamin was known as the name of a tribe. Nahor was found to be the name of a city near Haran. According to Genesis, Abraham lived in Haran many years before going to Canaan. Jacob spent 20 years there and married two women from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Amorites appear prominently in the OT as major obstacles to the occupation of Canaan (the Promised Land) by the Israelites after the exodus. Calling Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt, the Lord spoke of Canaan, then occupied by Amorites and others, as a good land (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, God promised to destroy those nations (Ex 23:23) and drive them out of the land (Ex 33:2). The Hebrew people were warned not to make covenants with any of them, to intermarry with them, or to tolerate their idol worship (Ex 34:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>Spies sent into the land found Amalekites in the south; Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the northern mountains and to the west of the Jordan River; and Canaanites by the sea and along the Jordan (Nm 13:25-29). At that time there were Amorites east of the Jordan as well (Nm 21:13).<\/p>\n<p>God had instructed Israel to go up from Horeb and conquer the mountain Amorites on the west side of the Jordan all the way to the Mediterranean Sea (Dt 1:7). When they arrived at Kadesh-barnea they were at the foot of those mountains (Dt 1:19-20). But the people murmured and complained that God had brought them from Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Amorites. From the spies’ reports, they pictured the Amorites as an awesome people, greater and taller than the Israelites (Dt 1:26-28). At first they refused to trust God enough to go in, so God told them to turn around and head back into the wilderness. Then they changed their minds, stubbornly attacked the Amorites against God’s command, and were badly beaten (Dt 1:34-44). Finally, after 38 additional years in the wilderness, the Israelites once again faced the Amorites, but this time on the east side of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:13). The Amorite king, Sihon, refused to let them pass through his land. The Israelites were drawn up at the Arnon River, which flows into the Dead Sea about two-thirds of the way up its eastern shore.<\/p>\n<p>Transjordan was controlled by two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. Israel had to face Sihon first. His city, Heshbon, lay due east of the north end of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:21-26). Sihon himself had taken this land from the Moabites. Moses knew of Sihon’s reputation and quoted a poem that boasted of Sihon’s victory over Moab (Nm 21:27-30). Nevertheless, the Israelites defeated Sihon and devastated his kingdom from Dibon, four miles (6.4 kilometers) north of the Arnon, to Medeba, seven miles (11.2 kilometers) south of Heshbon. King Og, farther to the north, received the same treatment (Nm 21:31-35). King Balak of Moab heard of the Israelite victories and was terrified (Nm 22:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the people that by relying on God’s promises they had taken all of the land of the Amorites east of the Jordan (Dt 2:24–3:10). The conquered territory was given to the tribes of Gad and Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Nm 32:33). Then, 40 years after the exodus began, Israel was standing on the east side of the Jordan, having dispossessed the two great Amorite nations there (Dt 1:1-4). But there were other Amorite kingdoms in the hills west of the Jordan, along with other nations (Dt 7:1-2). They were to be destroyed in the same way Sihon and Og had been defeated (Dt 31:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>So famous was the victory of Israel east of the Jordan that Rahab and others in Jericho, west of the Jordan, knew of it and were frightened (Jos 2:8-11). The Israelites crossed the Jordan and took Jericho but were defeated at the smaller city of Ai in the hill country west of Jericho. They immediately assumed that they would be wiped out by the Amorites in those hills (Jos 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites regained God’s favor, however, and defeated Ai. Their victory made an impression on the other kingdoms west of the Jordan in the hills, valleys, and coastlands up to Lebanon, who allied to fight Joshua (Jos 9:1-2). Gibeon, an Amorite city seven miles (11.2 kilometers) southwest of Ai, made peace with Israel, putting more fear in the hearts of the remaining kings (Jos 10:1-2). Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, was evidently the leader of the Amorite kings west of the Jordan (Jos 10:3). Jerusalem was only eight miles (12.8 kilometers) southeast of Gibeon. Adoni-zedek called together the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, all within 50 miles (80.4 kilometers) of Jerusalem, to fight against Gibeon and Joshua (Jos 10:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua came to Gibeon’s defense and routed the Amorites, chasing them to the northwest and southwest. The Lord fought for Israel, raining hailstones on the Amorites at Azekah, southwest of Gibeon, and causing the sun to stand still in order to provide a longer battle day (Jos 10:6-14).<\/p>\n<p>In the far north, Jabin, king of Hazor, rallied the Canaanites and remaining Amorites all the way north to Mt Hermon (Jos 11:1-5). But they too were overcome (Jos 11:10-23). Toward the end of Joshua’s career, he reminded the people that it was the Lord who had given them the land of the Amorites (Jos 24:1-18).<\/p>\n<p>After the occupation of Canaan by Israel, Amorites still present in the land chased Dan’s tribe into the mountains and continued to live near Aijalon, 17 miles (27.4 kilometers) west of Jerusalem. They still held the slopes toward the south end of the Dead Sea as well (Jgs 1:34-36). In the period of the judges, the Amorites and their gods posed a constant threat to Israel’s well-being (Jgs 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the period of the judges, relations between Israel and the Amorites improved (1 Sm 7:14). David continued to honor Joshua’s treaty with the Amorite remnant of Gibeon (2 Sm 21:2-6). Solomon conscripted his labor forces from the Amorites and other peoples still surviving from Israelite conquest (1 Kgs 9:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT treats the deliverance of the Amorites and their land into the hands of Israel as a great event comparable with the exodus itself, a victory to be remembered and celebrated (Pss 135:9-12; 136:13-26). If the people forgot, the Lord reminded them through his prophets (Am 2:9-10). Long after Sihon and Og had been defeated, the area east of the Jordan was still remembered as the land of “Sihon king of the Amorites” (1 Kgs 4:19). When the kings of Israel and Judah began to fail God, the memory of the Amorites provided a standard of comparison of evil. The Jews’ continuing fascination with idolatry led God to address Jerusalem, representing the Jewish people, through the prophet Ezekiel: “Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ez 16:45). In the biblical view, the Amorites stood for everything that is abominable in the sight of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AMORITES Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium BC. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine. Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called Amurru (translation of the Sumerian Mar-tu), perhap...","summary_en":"AMORITES Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium BC. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine. Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called Amurru (translation of the Sumerian Mar-tu), perhap...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4480,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Beth-Horon","title_en":"Beth-Horon","content_ro":"<h3>BETH-HORON<\/h3>\n<p>Canaanite place-name perhaps meaning “the house of Hauron,” the god of the underworld. Beth-horon was a dual settlement 10 and 12 miles (16.1 and 19.3 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem. Located on the boundary between the tribal territories of Ephraim and Benjamin (Jos 16:3, 5), the twin settlements controlled the valley of Aijalon, one of the most important ancient routes between the Mediterranean coast and the interior hill country. The upper town controlled a strategic pass. Ephraim’s “Beth-horon with its pasture lands” was assigned to the Levite family of Kohath (Jos 21:22; 1 Chr 6:68).<\/p>\n<p>Many armies marched through the Aijalon Valley. Amorites pursued by Joshua’s army fled past Beth-horon after being defeated at Gibeon on “the day the sun stood still” (Jos 10:1-14). A band of Philistines approached it to make war with Saul (1 Sm 13:18). The Egyptian army of Shishak passed by Beth-horon (according to his Karnak inscription). Syrian armies under Seron (1 Macc 3:13-24) and Nicanor (7:39-43) were defeated by Judas Maccabeus at Beth-horon. The Romans under Cestius were nearly annihilated there by the Jews, according to Jewish historian Josephus.<\/p>\n<p>Beth-horon was probably destroyed and rebuilt more than once. Sheerah, Beriah’s daughter and Ephraim’s granddaughter, is credited with building both lower and upper Beth-horon (1 Chr 7:24). King Solomon fortified both Beth-horons after raids in the vicinity by an Egyptian pharaoh (1 Kgs 9:15-17; 2 Chr 8:5). In the intertestamental period Beth-horon was fortified by the Syrian general Bacchides after a battle with Jonathan Maccabeus (1 Macc 9:50).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BETH-HORON<\/h3>\n<p>Canaanite place-name perhaps meaning “the house of Hauron,” the god of the underworld. Beth-horon was a dual settlement 10 and 12 miles (16.1 and 19.3 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem. Located on the boundary between the tribal territories of Ephraim and Benjamin (Jos 16:3, 5), the twin settlements controlled the valley of Aijalon, one of the most important ancient routes between the Mediterranean coast and the interior hill country. The upper town controlled a strategic pass. Ephraim’s “Beth-horon with its pasture lands” was assigned to the Levite family of Kohath (Jos 21:22; 1 Chr 6:68).<\/p>\n<p>Many armies marched through the Aijalon Valley. Amorites pursued by Joshua’s army fled past Beth-horon after being defeated at Gibeon on “the day the sun stood still” (Jos 10:1-14). A band of Philistines approached it to make war with Saul (1 Sm 13:18). The Egyptian army of Shishak passed by Beth-horon (according to his Karnak inscription). Syrian armies under Seron (1 Macc 3:13-24) and Nicanor (7:39-43) were defeated by Judas Maccabeus at Beth-horon. The Romans under Cestius were nearly annihilated there by the Jews, according to Jewish historian Josephus.<\/p>\n<p>Beth-horon was probably destroyed and rebuilt more than once. Sheerah, Beriah’s daughter and Ephraim’s granddaughter, is credited with building both lower and upper Beth-horon (1 Chr 7:24). King Solomon fortified both Beth-horons after raids in the vicinity by an Egyptian pharaoh (1 Kgs 9:15-17; 2 Chr 8:5). In the intertestamental period Beth-horon was fortified by the Syrian general Bacchides after a battle with Jonathan Maccabeus (1 Macc 9:50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BETH-HORON Canaanite place-name perhaps meaning “the house of Hauron,” the god of the underworld. Beth-horon was a dual settlement 10 and 12 miles (16.1 and 19.3 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem. Located on the boundary between the tribal territories of Ephraim and Benjamin (Jos 16:3, 5), the twin settlements controlled the valley of Aijalon, one of the most important ancient routes between the Mediterranean coast and the interior hill country. The upper town controlled a strategic pass. Ep...","summary_en":"BETH-HORON Canaanite place-name perhaps meaning “the house of Hauron,” the god of the underworld. Beth-horon was a dual settlement 10 and 12 miles (16.1 and 19.3 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem. Located on the boundary between the tribal territories of Ephraim and Benjamin (Jos 16:3, 5), the twin settlements controlled the valley of Aijalon, one of the most important ancient routes between the Mediterranean coast and the interior hill country. The upper town controlled a strategic pass. Ep...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7460,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Conquest and Allotment of the Land","title_en":"Conquest and Allotment of the Land","content_ro":"<h3>CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND<\/h3>\n<p>Terms referring to Israel’s winning of the Promised Land and the distinctive way in which it was divided among the Israelite tribes.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conquest\">Conquest<\/p>\n<p>The conquest of Canaan by the Israelites is one of the most remarkable events of OT history: a loosely organized nomadic people successfully invaded a long-established culture secure in its protected urban centers. That achievement, according to the Scriptures, was the result of a promise God had made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that their descendants would possess the land (Gn 17:8; 26:4; 28:13; Ex 3:15-17). Dispossession of the pagan inhabitants was a divine judgment on false religion and its associated immorality (Dt 7:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who attempt to reconstruct the history of the Conquest face certain problems. Critical scholarship has run into conflict with statements in the Bible at three key points: chronology, rate of occupation, and the issue of Israel’s military annihilation of portions of the population of the Canaanite city-states.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Reference works and scholarly treatments of OT history often suggest a date for the exodus from Egypt in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> (1280 <span>BC<\/span> or later). Several biblical references to that event would seem to call for an earlier date. According to 1 Kings 6:1, construction of Solomon’s temple was begun in the fourth year of his reign, 480 years after the exodus. Since Solomon’s fourth year was about 960 <span>BC<\/span>, that would place the exodus at 1440 <span>BC<\/span>. In Judges 11:26-28, when Jephthah, eighth of the named judges, argued with the king of Ammon about Israelite possession of land east of the Jordan River, he indicated that Israel had occupied this territory 300 years. Saul’s accession to kingship about 1020 <span>BC<\/span> was still some decades off, so the later date proposed for the exodus does not allow sufficient time for the period of the judges. Further, the apostle Paul referred to a period of about 450 years from the exodus to Samuel’s day (Acts 13:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JoshuasCampaigns\">Joshua’s Campaigns<\/p>\n<p>A picture of a concentrated period for the Israelite conquest of Canaan is given in the book of Joshua. Yet many scholars insist that an earlier gradual penetration occurred (by Hebrews who supposedly did not accompany Jacob into Egypt), plus an extended mopping-up procedure that continued down to the time of the monarchy. Although the biblical record allows for later acquisitions in some areas (e.g., Megiddo and Beth-shan), there is no valid reason for rejecting the description of the major Conquest given in Joshua 1–12.<\/p>\n<p>The Conquest began on the east side of the Jordan River under Moses. After Moses’ death, Joshua led Israel across the river, capturing first the fortified cities of Jericho and Ai. Those strategic victories provided access to the hill country and drove a wedge into the middle of Canaan. Two major campaigns followed—a southern and then a northern—which won for Israel in six years’ time the key cities of Canaan, defeating 31 kings and concluding the initial and principal stage of the Conquest.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 32 records the earlier assignment of territory east of the Jordan (Gilead and Bashan, acquired by the defeat of two kings, Sihon of the Amorites and Og of Bashan) to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. Though their land had already been acquired, the men of those tribes were obligated to cross the Jordan with the rest to participate in the military conquest of Canaan itself.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua 2–8 records the unusual events of the destruction of Jericho and Ai in the initial thrust westward. Those victories tended to demoralize the remaining cities of the land. Chapters 9 and 10 describe the southern campaign, including the Gibeonites’ procurement of a treaty by deception. Joshua 10, with its account of the remarkable rout of the enemy forces (vv 9-12) and miraculous prolonging of daylight, is the central passage about the southern campaign. In the subsequent battle, an alliance of five Amorite kings was crushed, the kings were killed, and the city-states of the area were destroyed, except for Jerusalem (later captured by David).<\/p>\n<p>In his northern campaign, Joshua confronted a more formidable alliance. Yet even Jabin, the powerful king of Hazor, largest of the Canaanite cities, supported by his local vassals, was no match for Israel’s armies. Joshua 11 describes that phase, then sums up the entire Conquest in verses 16-23 and on through chapter 12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND<\/h3>\n<p>Terms referring to Israel’s winning of the Promised Land and the distinctive way in which it was divided among the Israelite tribes.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conquest\">Conquest<\/p>\n<p>The conquest of Canaan by the Israelites is one of the most remarkable events of OT history: a loosely organized nomadic people successfully invaded a long-established culture secure in its protected urban centers. That achievement, according to the Scriptures, was the result of a promise God had made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that their descendants would possess the land (Gn 17:8; 26:4; 28:13; Ex 3:15-17). Dispossession of the pagan inhabitants was a divine judgment on false religion and its associated immorality (Dt 7:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who attempt to reconstruct the history of the Conquest face certain problems. Critical scholarship has run into conflict with statements in the Bible at three key points: chronology, rate of occupation, and the issue of Israel’s military annihilation of portions of the population of the Canaanite city-states.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Reference works and scholarly treatments of OT history often suggest a date for the exodus from Egypt in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> (1280 <span>BC<\/span> or later). Several biblical references to that event would seem to call for an earlier date. According to 1 Kings 6:1, construction of Solomon’s temple was begun in the fourth year of his reign, 480 years after the exodus. Since Solomon’s fourth year was about 960 <span>BC<\/span>, that would place the exodus at 1440 <span>BC<\/span>. In Judges 11:26-28, when Jephthah, eighth of the named judges, argued with the king of Ammon about Israelite possession of land east of the Jordan River, he indicated that Israel had occupied this territory 300 years. Saul’s accession to kingship about 1020 <span>BC<\/span> was still some decades off, so the later date proposed for the exodus does not allow sufficient time for the period of the judges. Further, the apostle Paul referred to a period of about 450 years from the exodus to Samuel’s day (Acts 13:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JoshuasCampaigns\">Joshua’s Campaigns<\/p>\n<p>A picture of a concentrated period for the Israelite conquest of Canaan is given in the book of Joshua. Yet many scholars insist that an earlier gradual penetration occurred (by Hebrews who supposedly did not accompany Jacob into Egypt), plus an extended mopping-up procedure that continued down to the time of the monarchy. Although the biblical record allows for later acquisitions in some areas (e.g., Megiddo and Beth-shan), there is no valid reason for rejecting the description of the major Conquest given in Joshua 1–12.<\/p>\n<p>The Conquest began on the east side of the Jordan River under Moses. After Moses’ death, Joshua led Israel across the river, capturing first the fortified cities of Jericho and Ai. Those strategic victories provided access to the hill country and drove a wedge into the middle of Canaan. Two major campaigns followed—a southern and then a northern—which won for Israel in six years’ time the key cities of Canaan, defeating 31 kings and concluding the initial and principal stage of the Conquest.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 32 records the earlier assignment of territory east of the Jordan (Gilead and Bashan, acquired by the defeat of two kings, Sihon of the Amorites and Og of Bashan) to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. Though their land had already been acquired, the men of those tribes were obligated to cross the Jordan with the rest to participate in the military conquest of Canaan itself.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua 2–8 records the unusual events of the destruction of Jericho and Ai in the initial thrust westward. Those victories tended to demoralize the remaining cities of the land. Chapters 9 and 10 describe the southern campaign, including the Gibeonites’ procurement of a treaty by deception. Joshua 10, with its account of the remarkable rout of the enemy forces (vv 9-12) and miraculous prolonging of daylight, is the central passage about the southern campaign. In the subsequent battle, an alliance of five Amorite kings was crushed, the kings were killed, and the city-states of the area were destroyed, except for Jerusalem (later captured by David).<\/p>\n<p>In his northern campaign, Joshua confronted a more formidable alliance. Yet even Jabin, the powerful king of Hazor, largest of the Canaanite cities, supported by his local vassals, was no match for Israel’s armies. Joshua 11 describes that phase, then sums up the entire Conquest in verses 16-23 and on through chapter 12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND Terms referring to Israel’s winning of the Promised Land and the distinctive way in which it was divided among the Israelite tribes. Conquest The conquest of Canaan by the Israelites is one of the most remarkable events of OT history: a loosely organized nomadic people successfully invaded a long-established culture secure in its protected urban centers. That achievement, according to the Scriptures, was the result of a promise God had made to Abraham, Isaac...","summary_en":"CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND Terms referring to Israel’s winning of the Promised Land and the distinctive way in which it was divided among the Israelite tribes. Conquest The conquest of Canaan by the Israelites is one of the most remarkable events of OT history: a loosely organized nomadic people successfully invaded a long-established culture secure in its protected urban centers. That achievement, according to the Scriptures, was the result of a promise God had made to Abraham, Isaac...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13777,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gibeonites Gibeon","title_en":"Gibeonites Gibeon","content_ro":"<h3>GIBEON, GIBEONITES<\/h3>\n<p>Place and its inhabitants figuring prominently in the OT from the days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, though both were in existence outside these time limits. The site may be identified with confidence as el-Jib some five and a half miles (8.9 kilometers) north of Jerusalem. This identification was proposed as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since the excavation of this site in the years 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of 31 jar handles bearing the name of Gibeon, the identification is placed beyond doubt. Certain geographical and chronological considerations also support this. The location of Gibeon, north of Jerusalem and accessible to that city in the days of David, Solomon, and Jeremiah, as well as its location southwest of Ai combine geographically to support this identification. Further, the periods of occupation at el-Jib revealed by excavation are parallel to historical data supplied by the OT.<\/p>\n<p>The first mention of Gibeon and its inhabitants comes in Joshua 9 and 10 in the days of Joshua, perhaps about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>. Hearing of the success of the people of Israel at Jericho and Ai, the people of Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim plotted to obtain a covenant of peace from them. By pretending that they had come from afar and displaying worn-out clothing and footwear as well as dried bread, they were able to deceive Joshua into making a treaty with them. When their deception was discovered, they were sentenced to chop wood and carry water for the Israelites (Jos 9:21-27). Neighboring groups of people from Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, led by Adoni-zedek king of Jerusalem, launched an attack on Gibeon because of its defection to Joshua. The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua, and the Israelites made a forced march from Gilgal to assist them. The enemies of Gibeon were driven down the road to Beth-horon. Their rout was completed with the assistance of hailstones. In that day the sun stood still over Gibeon (10:9-13). Only Gibeon made peace with the incoming Israelites (11:19). In due course the town became part of Benjamin’s territory (18:25; 21:17).<\/p>\n\n<p>In the days before David was king, Saul’s general encountered some of David’s men at Gibeon and engaged in an unusual contest at the pool of Gibeon. Twelve men from each side fought and were all thrust through by the swords of their opponents (2 Sm 2:12-17). This encounter was followed by a further skirmish in which David’s men were successful (vv 18-32). Later, David’s nephew Amasa, captain of the rebel army of Absalom, was attacked by Joab at the “great stone which is in Gibeon” (20:8) and left to die in the highway in his blood. In David’s time also, seven sons of Saul were executed “at Gibeon on the mountain of the Lord” (21:1-9) in retribution for Saul’s violation of the ancient covenant between Gibeon and Israel when he slew men of Gibeon (vv 1-6).<\/p>\n<p>There was an important high place still operating at Gibeon in David’s time. The tabernacle of the Lord rested there, and an altar of burnt offering as well (1 Chr 16:39; 21:29). It was at Gibeon, according to 1 Kings 3:3-9, that Solomon had a dream in which Solomon asked for wisdom to govern Israel well (cf. 2 Chr 1:2-13). A second time God appeared to Solomon at Gibeon to assure him that his prayer had been heard and to urge him to walk in God’s ways (1 Kgs 9:2-9). Gibeon was among the cities taken by Pharaoh Shishak in the second half of the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>. Presumably Gibeon remained an important center during the days of the kings. There was a prophet in Gibeon in the days of Jeremiah, although he prophesied falsely (Jer 28:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the Gibeonites went into exile in Babylon and a small group returned (Neh 7:25) and assisted Nehemiah in repairing the Jerusalem wall (3:7-8). Later still, Josephus relates that Cestius pitched his camp at Gibeon on his march to Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 66 (<em>War<\/em> 2.515-516). Biblical references cover a period from about 1200 <span>BC<\/span> to about 445 <span>BC<\/span>, in archaeological terms from the beginning of the Iron I period, through the Iron II period, and into the Persian or Iron III period. We would expect, therefore, to find evidence for at least these periods in an excavation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Gibbar.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GIBEON, GIBEONITES<\/h3>\n<p>Place and its inhabitants figuring prominently in the OT from the days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, though both were in existence outside these time limits. The site may be identified with confidence as el-Jib some five and a half miles (8.9 kilometers) north of Jerusalem. This identification was proposed as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since the excavation of this site in the years 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of 31 jar handles bearing the name of Gibeon, the identification is placed beyond doubt. Certain geographical and chronological considerations also support this. The location of Gibeon, north of Jerusalem and accessible to that city in the days of David, Solomon, and Jeremiah, as well as its location southwest of Ai combine geographically to support this identification. Further, the periods of occupation at el-Jib revealed by excavation are parallel to historical data supplied by the OT.<\/p>\n<p>The first mention of Gibeon and its inhabitants comes in Joshua 9 and 10 in the days of Joshua, perhaps about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>. Hearing of the success of the people of Israel at Jericho and Ai, the people of Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim plotted to obtain a covenant of peace from them. By pretending that they had come from afar and displaying worn-out clothing and footwear as well as dried bread, they were able to deceive Joshua into making a treaty with them. When their deception was discovered, they were sentenced to chop wood and carry water for the Israelites (Jos 9:21-27). Neighboring groups of people from Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, led by Adoni-zedek king of Jerusalem, launched an attack on Gibeon because of its defection to Joshua. The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua, and the Israelites made a forced march from Gilgal to assist them. The enemies of Gibeon were driven down the road to Beth-horon. Their rout was completed with the assistance of hailstones. In that day the sun stood still over Gibeon (10:9-13). Only Gibeon made peace with the incoming Israelites (11:19). In due course the town became part of Benjamin’s territory (18:25; 21:17).<\/p>\n\n<p>In the days before David was king, Saul’s general encountered some of David’s men at Gibeon and engaged in an unusual contest at the pool of Gibeon. Twelve men from each side fought and were all thrust through by the swords of their opponents (2 Sm 2:12-17). This encounter was followed by a further skirmish in which David’s men were successful (vv 18-32). Later, David’s nephew Amasa, captain of the rebel army of Absalom, was attacked by Joab at the “great stone which is in Gibeon” (20:8) and left to die in the highway in his blood. In David’s time also, seven sons of Saul were executed “at Gibeon on the mountain of the Lord” (21:1-9) in retribution for Saul’s violation of the ancient covenant between Gibeon and Israel when he slew men of Gibeon (vv 1-6).<\/p>\n<p>There was an important high place still operating at Gibeon in David’s time. The tabernacle of the Lord rested there, and an altar of burnt offering as well (1 Chr 16:39; 21:29). It was at Gibeon, according to 1 Kings 3:3-9, that Solomon had a dream in which Solomon asked for wisdom to govern Israel well (cf. 2 Chr 1:2-13). A second time God appeared to Solomon at Gibeon to assure him that his prayer had been heard and to urge him to walk in God’s ways (1 Kgs 9:2-9). Gibeon was among the cities taken by Pharaoh Shishak in the second half of the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>. Presumably Gibeon remained an important center during the days of the kings. There was a prophet in Gibeon in the days of Jeremiah, although he prophesied falsely (Jer 28:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the Gibeonites went into exile in Babylon and a small group returned (Neh 7:25) and assisted Nehemiah in repairing the Jerusalem wall (3:7-8). Later still, Josephus relates that Cestius pitched his camp at Gibeon on his march to Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 66 (<em>War<\/em> 2.515-516). Biblical references cover a period from about 1200 <span>BC<\/span> to about 445 <span>BC<\/span>, in archaeological terms from the beginning of the Iron I period, through the Iron II period, and into the Persian or Iron III period. We would expect, therefore, to find evidence for at least these periods in an excavation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Gibbar.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GIBEON, GIBEONITES Place and its inhabitants figuring prominently in the OT from the days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, though both were in existence outside these time limits. The site may be identified with confidence as el-Jib some five and a half miles (8.9 kilometers) north of Jerusalem. This identification was proposed as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since the excavation of this site in the years 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of 31 jar handles bearing the...","summary_en":"GIBEON, GIBEONITES Place and its inhabitants figuring prominently in the OT from the days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, though both were in existence outside these time limits. The site may be identified with confidence as el-Jib some five and a half miles (8.9 kilometers) north of Jerusalem. This identification was proposed as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since the excavation of this site in the years 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of 31 jar handles bearing the...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20631,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joshua (Person)","title_en":"Joshua (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, <span>kjv<\/span> “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17).<\/li>\n<p>Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is My Banner” (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land of Canaan, Joshua represented the tribe of Ephraim (Nm 13:8). At that time Joshua was called Hoshea, but Moses changed his name to Joshua (vv 8, 16). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies to bring back an affirmative report concerning an Israelite invasion of the land (14:6-9). Consequently, of all the adult Israelite males to leave Egypt in the exodus, only these two crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord announced to Moses his impending death, Moses asked about his successor, and the Lord appointed Joshua to that position (Nm 27:12-23). After the death of Moses on Mt Nebo, Joshua’s leadership was confirmed (34:17), and the Lord told Joshua to go over the Jordan and take the land (Jos 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>From the Transjordan, Joshua sent two men across the river to reconnoiter Jericho (ch 2). In Jericho they were concealed by Rahab and later safely made their way back to Joshua to report that the people of the land were fainthearted because of the Israelites (vv 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>When Israel had crossed the river, the Lord instructed Joshua to set up a circle of 12 stones at Gilgal to commemorate this passage (Jos 4:1-7). The Lord then commanded all of the males who had been born during the exodus to be circumcised (5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>While camped at Gilgal, near Jericho, Joshua was confronted by a man with a drawn sword. When Joshua challenged the man, he learned that it was the Lord, who told him to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy (Jos 5:13-15). The Lord gave Joshua directions for the destruction of Jericho; these were followed explicitly and the city fell (ch 6). The attack on Ai ended in temporary defeat, until the matter of Achan’s sin was discovered and judged (7:10-26). Then Ai was taken and destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-32), and the blessings and curses were read, as commanded by God through Moses (Jos 8:33-35; cf. Dt 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Because the Israelites failed to ask direction from the Lord (Jos 9:14), Joshua was tricked into making a covenant of peace with the Hivites of Gibeon. Joshua then reduced them to doing menial tasks in Israel (vv 21-27).<\/p>\n<p>The kings of the various Canaanite cities allied themselves against the Israelite threat (Jos 9:1-2) and a league of five Amorite cities (Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon) attacked Gibeon (10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua for help; he responded quickly against this Amorite confederation and routed the Amorite forces. It was on this occasion that Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand still so that Israel could have more time to defeat these adversaries (vv 12-14). This victory was followed by a series of successful attacks on enemy towns (vv 28-43).<\/p>\n<p>A northern alliance headed by Jabin, king of Hazor, was the next opposition (Jos 11:1-5). The Lord assured Joshua of success, and the city of Hazor was taken and destroyed by fire (vv 6-15). Joshua 11:23 summarizes the conquest of the land, and chapter 12 enumerates the kings who were conquered.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was now old, and the Lord told him that much land remained to be possessed. These territories are listed, but the Lord directed Joshua to proceed with the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes (Jos 13:7; cf. 13:8–18:28). Joshua himself was given the city he asked for, Timnath-serah, in the hill country of Ephraim, which he rebuilt and settled (19:49-50).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord told Joshua to appoint cities of refuge to which a person guilty of manslaughter could flee to escape the avenger of blood (Jos 20). Then the Levites came to Eleazar the priest and Joshua to request that they be given their cities, as the Lord had commanded through Moses (21:1-42).<\/p>\n\n<p>In his advanced years Joshua summoned all Israel and solemnly charged them to continue in faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 23). Finally, he called all Israel to Shechem, where he gave them his farewell message. He summed up the Lord’s dealings with them from the time of Abraham and again challenged them to serve the Lord, putting before them the well-known choice and decision: “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died at the age of 110 years and was buried in the land of his inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:29-30; the parallel account in Jgs 2:8-9 reads “Timnath-heres,” <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Israel served the Lord during all the days of Joshua and the elders who outlived him (Jos 24:31; Jgs 2:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Inhabitant of Beth-shemesh. It was his grainfield into which the cart carrying the ark sent by the Philistines came. It stopped by a large stone which was then used to commemorate this event (1 Sm 6:14, 18).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Jerusalem during King Josiah’s reign (2 Kgs 23:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Jozadak’s son and high priest during the days of Zerubbabel in postexilic Jerusalem (Hg 1:1-14; 2:2-4; Zec 3:1-9; 6:11; <span>nlt<\/span> “Jeshua”). Joshua is alternately called Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. <em>See<\/em> Jeshua (Person) #3.<\/li>\n<li>5. Eliezer’s son and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, <span>kjv<\/span> “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17).<\/li>\n<p>Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is My Banner” (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land of Canaan, Joshua represented the tribe of Ephraim (Nm 13:8). At that time Joshua was called Hoshea, but Moses changed his name to Joshua (vv 8, 16). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies to bring back an affirmative report concerning an Israelite invasion of the land (14:6-9). Consequently, of all the adult Israelite males to leave Egypt in the exodus, only these two crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord announced to Moses his impending death, Moses asked about his successor, and the Lord appointed Joshua to that position (Nm 27:12-23). After the death of Moses on Mt Nebo, Joshua’s leadership was confirmed (34:17), and the Lord told Joshua to go over the Jordan and take the land (Jos 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>From the Transjordan, Joshua sent two men across the river to reconnoiter Jericho (ch 2). In Jericho they were concealed by Rahab and later safely made their way back to Joshua to report that the people of the land were fainthearted because of the Israelites (vv 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>When Israel had crossed the river, the Lord instructed Joshua to set up a circle of 12 stones at Gilgal to commemorate this passage (Jos 4:1-7). The Lord then commanded all of the males who had been born during the exodus to be circumcised (5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>While camped at Gilgal, near Jericho, Joshua was confronted by a man with a drawn sword. When Joshua challenged the man, he learned that it was the Lord, who told him to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy (Jos 5:13-15). The Lord gave Joshua directions for the destruction of Jericho; these were followed explicitly and the city fell (ch 6). The attack on Ai ended in temporary defeat, until the matter of Achan’s sin was discovered and judged (7:10-26). Then Ai was taken and destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-32), and the blessings and curses were read, as commanded by God through Moses (Jos 8:33-35; cf. Dt 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Because the Israelites failed to ask direction from the Lord (Jos 9:14), Joshua was tricked into making a covenant of peace with the Hivites of Gibeon. Joshua then reduced them to doing menial tasks in Israel (vv 21-27).<\/p>\n<p>The kings of the various Canaanite cities allied themselves against the Israelite threat (Jos 9:1-2) and a league of five Amorite cities (Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon) attacked Gibeon (10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua for help; he responded quickly against this Amorite confederation and routed the Amorite forces. It was on this occasion that Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand still so that Israel could have more time to defeat these adversaries (vv 12-14). This victory was followed by a series of successful attacks on enemy towns (vv 28-43).<\/p>\n<p>A northern alliance headed by Jabin, king of Hazor, was the next opposition (Jos 11:1-5). The Lord assured Joshua of success, and the city of Hazor was taken and destroyed by fire (vv 6-15). Joshua 11:23 summarizes the conquest of the land, and chapter 12 enumerates the kings who were conquered.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was now old, and the Lord told him that much land remained to be possessed. These territories are listed, but the Lord directed Joshua to proceed with the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes (Jos 13:7; cf. 13:8–18:28). Joshua himself was given the city he asked for, Timnath-serah, in the hill country of Ephraim, which he rebuilt and settled (19:49-50).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord told Joshua to appoint cities of refuge to which a person guilty of manslaughter could flee to escape the avenger of blood (Jos 20). Then the Levites came to Eleazar the priest and Joshua to request that they be given their cities, as the Lord had commanded through Moses (21:1-42).<\/p>\n\n<p>In his advanced years Joshua summoned all Israel and solemnly charged them to continue in faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 23). Finally, he called all Israel to Shechem, where he gave them his farewell message. He summed up the Lord’s dealings with them from the time of Abraham and again challenged them to serve the Lord, putting before them the well-known choice and decision: “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died at the age of 110 years and was buried in the land of his inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:29-30; the parallel account in Jgs 2:8-9 reads “Timnath-heres,” <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Israel served the Lord during all the days of Joshua and the elders who outlived him (Jos 24:31; Jgs 2:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Inhabitant of Beth-shemesh. It was his grainfield into which the cart carrying the ark sent by the Philistines came. It stopped by a large stone which was then used to commemorate this event (1 Sm 6:14, 18).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Jerusalem during King Josiah’s reign (2 Kgs 23:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Jozadak’s son and high priest during the days of Zerubbabel in postexilic Jerusalem (Hg 1:1-14; 2:2-4; Zec 3:1-9; 6:11; <span>nlt<\/span> “Jeshua”). Joshua is alternately called Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. <em>See<\/em> Jeshua (Person) #3.<\/li>\n<li>5. Eliezer’s son and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA (Person) 1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, kjv “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17). Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The Lord Is My Banner” (v 15). When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA (Person) 1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, kjv “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17). Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The Lord Is My Banner” (v 15). When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20681,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45395,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1–12:24<\/strong> This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1–12:24<\/strong> This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1–12:24 This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.","summary_en":"7:1–12:24 This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45451,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1-43<\/strong> Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1-43<\/strong> Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1-43 Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.","summary_en":"10:1-43 Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45452,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1<\/strong> <em>Adoni-zedek<\/em> means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1<\/strong> <em>Adoni-zedek<\/em> means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1 Adoni-zedek means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.","summary_en":"10:1 Adoni-zedek means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73021,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1–12:24<\/strong> This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1–12:24<\/strong> This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1–12:24 This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.","summary_en":"7:1–12:24 This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73077,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1-43<\/strong> Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1-43<\/strong> Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1-43 Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.","summary_en":"10:1-43 Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73078,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1<\/strong> <em>Adoni-zedek<\/em> means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1<\/strong> <em>Adoni-zedek<\/em> means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1 Adoni-zedek means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.","summary_en":"10:1 Adoni-zedek means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100647,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1–12:24<\/strong> This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1–12:24<\/strong> This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1–12:24 This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.","summary_en":"7:1–12:24 This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100703,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1-43<\/strong> Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1-43<\/strong> Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1-43 Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.","summary_en":"10:1-43 Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100704,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1<\/strong> <em>Adoni-zedek<\/em> means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1<\/strong> <em>Adoni-zedek<\/em> means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1 Adoni-zedek means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.","summary_en":"10:1 Adoni-zedek means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128273,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1–12:24<\/strong> This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1–12:24<\/strong> This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1–12:24 This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.","summary_en":"7:1–12:24 This second major section of the book includes a record of Joshua’s southern and northern campaigns against two coalitions of Canaanite kings. Joshua’s victories enabled Israel to settle the hill country from Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128329,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1-43<\/strong> Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1-43<\/strong> Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1-43 Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.","summary_en":"10:1-43 Gibeon and its neighboring cities occupied a plateau north of Jerusalem (see study note on 7:2). With Gibeon now allied to Israel, control of the plateau and of the central hill country in the vicinity of Gibeon belonged to Israel. Throughout history, whoever has controlled the plateau has, in general, also controlled the hill country. The Canaanite kings had to conquer Gibeon or their cause was lost.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128330,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:1","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:1<\/strong> <em>Adoni-zedek<\/em> means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:1<\/strong> <em>Adoni-zedek<\/em> means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:1 Adoni-zedek means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.","summary_en":"10:1 Adoni-zedek means “master of righteousness” or “my master is righteous.” An earlier king of Jerusalem named Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”) had been “a priest of God Most High” and a friend of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). However, Adoni-zedek was not a friend to Joshua or a believer in the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":45453,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:2","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>Gibeon<\/em> was apparently not one of <em>the royal cities<\/em>. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>Gibeon<\/em> was apparently not one of <em>the royal cities<\/em>. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:2 Gibeon was apparently not one of the royal cities. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.","summary_en":"10:2 Gibeon was apparently not one of the royal cities. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73079,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:2","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>Gibeon<\/em> was apparently not one of <em>the royal cities<\/em>. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>Gibeon<\/em> was apparently not one of <em>the royal cities<\/em>. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:2 Gibeon was apparently not one of the royal cities. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.","summary_en":"10:2 Gibeon was apparently not one of the royal cities. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100705,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:2","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>Gibeon<\/em> was apparently not one of <em>the royal cities<\/em>. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>Gibeon<\/em> was apparently not one of <em>the royal cities<\/em>. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:2 Gibeon was apparently not one of the royal cities. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.","summary_en":"10:2 Gibeon was apparently not one of the royal cities. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128331,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:2","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>Gibeon<\/em> was apparently not one of <em>the royal cities<\/em>. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:2<\/strong> <em>Gibeon<\/em> was apparently not one of <em>the royal cities<\/em>. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:2 Gibeon was apparently not one of the royal cities. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.","summary_en":"10:2 Gibeon was apparently not one of the royal cities. Gibeon might have been subservient to Canaan-controlled Jerusalem before making the covenant with Joshua, or it might have been an independent town controlled by a few leading families.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":1418,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Amorites","title_en":"Amorites","content_ro":"<h3>AMORITES<\/h3>\n<p>Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called <em>Amurru<\/em> (translation of the Sumerian <em>Mar-tu<\/em>), perhaps named for a storm god. They overran the Sumerians and eventually most of Mesopotamia. The city of Mari, on the upper Euphrates River, fell to them about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; Eshunna a short time later; Babylon by 1830 <span>BC<\/span>; and finally Assur around 1750 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Farther to the west, Amorites had been in Palestine and Syria as early as the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Egyptian texts of the early part of the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> show that additional waves of Amorite nomads were entering Canaan at that time. Many of their names are similar to the Amorite names from upper Mesopotamia. In fact, many names from the Mari tablets are identical with or similar to names in the patriarchal accounts in Genesis. People named Jacob, Abraham, Levi, and Ishmael were known at Mari, and names similar to Gad and Dan have been found there. Benjamin was known as the name of a tribe. Nahor was found to be the name of a city near Haran. According to Genesis, Abraham lived in Haran many years before going to Canaan. Jacob spent 20 years there and married two women from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Amorites appear prominently in the OT as major obstacles to the occupation of Canaan (the Promised Land) by the Israelites after the exodus. Calling Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt, the Lord spoke of Canaan, then occupied by Amorites and others, as a good land (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, God promised to destroy those nations (Ex 23:23) and drive them out of the land (Ex 33:2). The Hebrew people were warned not to make covenants with any of them, to intermarry with them, or to tolerate their idol worship (Ex 34:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>Spies sent into the land found Amalekites in the south; Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the northern mountains and to the west of the Jordan River; and Canaanites by the sea and along the Jordan (Nm 13:25-29). At that time there were Amorites east of the Jordan as well (Nm 21:13).<\/p>\n<p>God had instructed Israel to go up from Horeb and conquer the mountain Amorites on the west side of the Jordan all the way to the Mediterranean Sea (Dt 1:7). When they arrived at Kadesh-barnea they were at the foot of those mountains (Dt 1:19-20). But the people murmured and complained that God had brought them from Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Amorites. From the spies’ reports, they pictured the Amorites as an awesome people, greater and taller than the Israelites (Dt 1:26-28). At first they refused to trust God enough to go in, so God told them to turn around and head back into the wilderness. Then they changed their minds, stubbornly attacked the Amorites against God’s command, and were badly beaten (Dt 1:34-44). Finally, after 38 additional years in the wilderness, the Israelites once again faced the Amorites, but this time on the east side of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:13). The Amorite king, Sihon, refused to let them pass through his land. The Israelites were drawn up at the Arnon River, which flows into the Dead Sea about two-thirds of the way up its eastern shore.<\/p>\n<p>Transjordan was controlled by two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. Israel had to face Sihon first. His city, Heshbon, lay due east of the north end of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:21-26). Sihon himself had taken this land from the Moabites. Moses knew of Sihon’s reputation and quoted a poem that boasted of Sihon’s victory over Moab (Nm 21:27-30). Nevertheless, the Israelites defeated Sihon and devastated his kingdom from Dibon, four miles (6.4 kilometers) north of the Arnon, to Medeba, seven miles (11.2 kilometers) south of Heshbon. King Og, farther to the north, received the same treatment (Nm 21:31-35). King Balak of Moab heard of the Israelite victories and was terrified (Nm 22:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the people that by relying on God’s promises they had taken all of the land of the Amorites east of the Jordan (Dt 2:24–3:10). The conquered territory was given to the tribes of Gad and Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Nm 32:33). Then, 40 years after the exodus began, Israel was standing on the east side of the Jordan, having dispossessed the two great Amorite nations there (Dt 1:1-4). But there were other Amorite kingdoms in the hills west of the Jordan, along with other nations (Dt 7:1-2). They were to be destroyed in the same way Sihon and Og had been defeated (Dt 31:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>So famous was the victory of Israel east of the Jordan that Rahab and others in Jericho, west of the Jordan, knew of it and were frightened (Jos 2:8-11). The Israelites crossed the Jordan and took Jericho but were defeated at the smaller city of Ai in the hill country west of Jericho. They immediately assumed that they would be wiped out by the Amorites in those hills (Jos 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites regained God’s favor, however, and defeated Ai. Their victory made an impression on the other kingdoms west of the Jordan in the hills, valleys, and coastlands up to Lebanon, who allied to fight Joshua (Jos 9:1-2). Gibeon, an Amorite city seven miles (11.2 kilometers) southwest of Ai, made peace with Israel, putting more fear in the hearts of the remaining kings (Jos 10:1-2). Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, was evidently the leader of the Amorite kings west of the Jordan (Jos 10:3). Jerusalem was only eight miles (12.8 kilometers) southeast of Gibeon. Adoni-zedek called together the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, all within 50 miles (80.4 kilometers) of Jerusalem, to fight against Gibeon and Joshua (Jos 10:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua came to Gibeon’s defense and routed the Amorites, chasing them to the northwest and southwest. The Lord fought for Israel, raining hailstones on the Amorites at Azekah, southwest of Gibeon, and causing the sun to stand still in order to provide a longer battle day (Jos 10:6-14).<\/p>\n<p>In the far north, Jabin, king of Hazor, rallied the Canaanites and remaining Amorites all the way north to Mt Hermon (Jos 11:1-5). But they too were overcome (Jos 11:10-23). Toward the end of Joshua’s career, he reminded the people that it was the Lord who had given them the land of the Amorites (Jos 24:1-18).<\/p>\n<p>After the occupation of Canaan by Israel, Amorites still present in the land chased Dan’s tribe into the mountains and continued to live near Aijalon, 17 miles (27.4 kilometers) west of Jerusalem. They still held the slopes toward the south end of the Dead Sea as well (Jgs 1:34-36). In the period of the judges, the Amorites and their gods posed a constant threat to Israel’s well-being (Jgs 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the period of the judges, relations between Israel and the Amorites improved (1 Sm 7:14). David continued to honor Joshua’s treaty with the Amorite remnant of Gibeon (2 Sm 21:2-6). Solomon conscripted his labor forces from the Amorites and other peoples still surviving from Israelite conquest (1 Kgs 9:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT treats the deliverance of the Amorites and their land into the hands of Israel as a great event comparable with the exodus itself, a victory to be remembered and celebrated (Pss 135:9-12; 136:13-26). If the people forgot, the Lord reminded them through his prophets (Am 2:9-10). Long after Sihon and Og had been defeated, the area east of the Jordan was still remembered as the land of “Sihon king of the Amorites” (1 Kgs 4:19). When the kings of Israel and Judah began to fail God, the memory of the Amorites provided a standard of comparison of evil. The Jews’ continuing fascination with idolatry led God to address Jerusalem, representing the Jewish people, through the prophet Ezekiel: “Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ez 16:45). In the biblical view, the Amorites stood for everything that is abominable in the sight of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AMORITES<\/h3>\n<p>Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called <em>Amurru<\/em> (translation of the Sumerian <em>Mar-tu<\/em>), perhaps named for a storm god. They overran the Sumerians and eventually most of Mesopotamia. The city of Mari, on the upper Euphrates River, fell to them about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; Eshunna a short time later; Babylon by 1830 <span>BC<\/span>; and finally Assur around 1750 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Farther to the west, Amorites had been in Palestine and Syria as early as the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Egyptian texts of the early part of the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> show that additional waves of Amorite nomads were entering Canaan at that time. Many of their names are similar to the Amorite names from upper Mesopotamia. In fact, many names from the Mari tablets are identical with or similar to names in the patriarchal accounts in Genesis. People named Jacob, Abraham, Levi, and Ishmael were known at Mari, and names similar to Gad and Dan have been found there. Benjamin was known as the name of a tribe. Nahor was found to be the name of a city near Haran. According to Genesis, Abraham lived in Haran many years before going to Canaan. Jacob spent 20 years there and married two women from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Amorites appear prominently in the OT as major obstacles to the occupation of Canaan (the Promised Land) by the Israelites after the exodus. Calling Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt, the Lord spoke of Canaan, then occupied by Amorites and others, as a good land (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, God promised to destroy those nations (Ex 23:23) and drive them out of the land (Ex 33:2). The Hebrew people were warned not to make covenants with any of them, to intermarry with them, or to tolerate their idol worship (Ex 34:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>Spies sent into the land found Amalekites in the south; Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the northern mountains and to the west of the Jordan River; and Canaanites by the sea and along the Jordan (Nm 13:25-29). At that time there were Amorites east of the Jordan as well (Nm 21:13).<\/p>\n<p>God had instructed Israel to go up from Horeb and conquer the mountain Amorites on the west side of the Jordan all the way to the Mediterranean Sea (Dt 1:7). When they arrived at Kadesh-barnea they were at the foot of those mountains (Dt 1:19-20). But the people murmured and complained that God had brought them from Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Amorites. From the spies’ reports, they pictured the Amorites as an awesome people, greater and taller than the Israelites (Dt 1:26-28). At first they refused to trust God enough to go in, so God told them to turn around and head back into the wilderness. Then they changed their minds, stubbornly attacked the Amorites against God’s command, and were badly beaten (Dt 1:34-44). Finally, after 38 additional years in the wilderness, the Israelites once again faced the Amorites, but this time on the east side of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:13). The Amorite king, Sihon, refused to let them pass through his land. The Israelites were drawn up at the Arnon River, which flows into the Dead Sea about two-thirds of the way up its eastern shore.<\/p>\n<p>Transjordan was controlled by two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. Israel had to face Sihon first. His city, Heshbon, lay due east of the north end of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:21-26). Sihon himself had taken this land from the Moabites. Moses knew of Sihon’s reputation and quoted a poem that boasted of Sihon’s victory over Moab (Nm 21:27-30). Nevertheless, the Israelites defeated Sihon and devastated his kingdom from Dibon, four miles (6.4 kilometers) north of the Arnon, to Medeba, seven miles (11.2 kilometers) south of Heshbon. King Og, farther to the north, received the same treatment (Nm 21:31-35). King Balak of Moab heard of the Israelite victories and was terrified (Nm 22:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the people that by relying on God’s promises they had taken all of the land of the Amorites east of the Jordan (Dt 2:24–3:10). The conquered territory was given to the tribes of Gad and Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Nm 32:33). Then, 40 years after the exodus began, Israel was standing on the east side of the Jordan, having dispossessed the two great Amorite nations there (Dt 1:1-4). But there were other Amorite kingdoms in the hills west of the Jordan, along with other nations (Dt 7:1-2). They were to be destroyed in the same way Sihon and Og had been defeated (Dt 31:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>So famous was the victory of Israel east of the Jordan that Rahab and others in Jericho, west of the Jordan, knew of it and were frightened (Jos 2:8-11). The Israelites crossed the Jordan and took Jericho but were defeated at the smaller city of Ai in the hill country west of Jericho. They immediately assumed that they would be wiped out by the Amorites in those hills (Jos 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites regained God’s favor, however, and defeated Ai. Their victory made an impression on the other kingdoms west of the Jordan in the hills, valleys, and coastlands up to Lebanon, who allied to fight Joshua (Jos 9:1-2). Gibeon, an Amorite city seven miles (11.2 kilometers) southwest of Ai, made peace with Israel, putting more fear in the hearts of the remaining kings (Jos 10:1-2). Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, was evidently the leader of the Amorite kings west of the Jordan (Jos 10:3). Jerusalem was only eight miles (12.8 kilometers) southeast of Gibeon. Adoni-zedek called together the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, all within 50 miles (80.4 kilometers) of Jerusalem, to fight against Gibeon and Joshua (Jos 10:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua came to Gibeon’s defense and routed the Amorites, chasing them to the northwest and southwest. The Lord fought for Israel, raining hailstones on the Amorites at Azekah, southwest of Gibeon, and causing the sun to stand still in order to provide a longer battle day (Jos 10:6-14).<\/p>\n<p>In the far north, Jabin, king of Hazor, rallied the Canaanites and remaining Amorites all the way north to Mt Hermon (Jos 11:1-5). But they too were overcome (Jos 11:10-23). Toward the end of Joshua’s career, he reminded the people that it was the Lord who had given them the land of the Amorites (Jos 24:1-18).<\/p>\n<p>After the occupation of Canaan by Israel, Amorites still present in the land chased Dan’s tribe into the mountains and continued to live near Aijalon, 17 miles (27.4 kilometers) west of Jerusalem. They still held the slopes toward the south end of the Dead Sea as well (Jgs 1:34-36). In the period of the judges, the Amorites and their gods posed a constant threat to Israel’s well-being (Jgs 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the period of the judges, relations between Israel and the Amorites improved (1 Sm 7:14). David continued to honor Joshua’s treaty with the Amorite remnant of Gibeon (2 Sm 21:2-6). Solomon conscripted his labor forces from the Amorites and other peoples still surviving from Israelite conquest (1 Kgs 9:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT treats the deliverance of the Amorites and their land into the hands of Israel as a great event comparable with the exodus itself, a victory to be remembered and celebrated (Pss 135:9-12; 136:13-26). If the people forgot, the Lord reminded them through his prophets (Am 2:9-10). Long after Sihon and Og had been defeated, the area east of the Jordan was still remembered as the land of “Sihon king of the Amorites” (1 Kgs 4:19). When the kings of Israel and Judah began to fail God, the memory of the Amorites provided a standard of comparison of evil. The Jews’ continuing fascination with idolatry led God to address Jerusalem, representing the Jewish people, through the prophet Ezekiel: “Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ez 16:45). In the biblical view, the Amorites stood for everything that is abominable in the sight of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AMORITES Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium BC. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine. Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called Amurru (translation of the Sumerian Mar-tu), perhap...","summary_en":"AMORITES Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium BC. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine. Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called Amurru (translation of the Sumerian Mar-tu), perhap...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16514,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hoham","title_en":"Hoham","content_ro":"<h3>HOHAM<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Hebron, confederate with four other kings in reprisals against Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos 10:3). They were defeated and put to death at the cave of Makkedah (vv 16-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOHAM<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Hebron, confederate with four other kings in reprisals against Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos 10:3). They were defeated and put to death at the cave of Makkedah (vv 16-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOHAM Amorite king of Hebron, confederate with four other kings in reprisals against Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos 10:3). They were defeated and put to death at the cave of Makkedah (vv 16-27).","summary_en":"HOHAM Amorite king of Hebron, confederate with four other kings in reprisals against Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos 10:3). They were defeated and put to death at the cave of Makkedah (vv 16-27).","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18508,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Japhia (Person)","title_en":"Japhia (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JAPHIA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. King of Lachish who joined an alliance of four other Amorite kings to punish Gibeon for its treaty with the Jews. Joshua dealt a total defeat to the Amorites at the battle of Beth-horon (aided by hailstones and the sun standing still). Japhia and the four kings hid in a cave at Makkedah but were discovered and hung by Joshua (Jos 10:3-27).<\/li>\n<li>2. Son born to David while he was king in Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:15; 1 Chr 3:7; 14:6).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JAPHIA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. King of Lachish who joined an alliance of four other Amorite kings to punish Gibeon for its treaty with the Jews. Joshua dealt a total defeat to the Amorites at the battle of Beth-horon (aided by hailstones and the sun standing still). Japhia and the four kings hid in a cave at Makkedah but were discovered and hung by Joshua (Jos 10:3-27).<\/li>\n<li>2. Son born to David while he was king in Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:15; 1 Chr 3:7; 14:6).<\/li>","summary_ro":"JAPHIA (Person) 1. King of Lachish who joined an alliance of four other Amorite kings to punish Gibeon for its treaty with the Jews. Joshua dealt a total defeat to the Amorites at the battle of Beth-horon (aided by hailstones and the sun standing still). Japhia and the four kings hid in a cave at Makkedah but were discovered and hung by Joshua (Jos 10:3-27). 2. Son born to David while he was king in Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:15; 1 Chr 3:7; 14:6).","summary_en":"JAPHIA (Person) 1. King of Lachish who joined an alliance of four other Amorite kings to punish Gibeon for its treaty with the Jews. Joshua dealt a total defeat to the Amorites at the battle of Beth-horon (aided by hailstones and the sun standing still). Japhia and the four kings hid in a cave at Makkedah but were discovered and hung by Joshua (Jos 10:3-27). 2. Son born to David while he was king in Jerusalem (2 Sm 5:15; 1 Chr 3:7; 14:6).","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18528,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jarmuth","title_en":"Jarmuth","content_ro":"<h3>JARMUTH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Fortified city in the northern part of the Shephelah given to Judah’s tribe for an inheritance (Jos 15:35). It was one of five Amorite cities that banded together to attack Gibeon after they had made peace with Joshua and Israel (10:3-5). Jarmuth was reinhabited after the exile by people of Judah (Neh 11:29), and possibly maintained a population throughout the Dispersion. It is identified with Khirbet Yarmuk, 18 miles (29 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem. Archaeological evidence suggests that the area of the Bronze Age city was six to eight acres (2.4 to 3.2 hectares) and had a population of about 1,500 to 2,000 people. It is mentioned in the Amarna letters as receiving aid from Lachish.<\/li>\n<li>2. One of four cities of Issachar given to the Levites for their inheritance (Jos 21:28-29). It is apparently identifiable with Ramoth in 1 Chronicles 6:73 and Remeth in Joshua 19:21. A stele of Pharaoh Seti I was found at Beth-shan, referring to the whole area as Mt Jarmuth.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JARMUTH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Fortified city in the northern part of the Shephelah given to Judah’s tribe for an inheritance (Jos 15:35). It was one of five Amorite cities that banded together to attack Gibeon after they had made peace with Joshua and Israel (10:3-5). Jarmuth was reinhabited after the exile by people of Judah (Neh 11:29), and possibly maintained a population throughout the Dispersion. It is identified with Khirbet Yarmuk, 18 miles (29 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem. Archaeological evidence suggests that the area of the Bronze Age city was six to eight acres (2.4 to 3.2 hectares) and had a population of about 1,500 to 2,000 people. It is mentioned in the Amarna letters as receiving aid from Lachish.<\/li>\n<li>2. One of four cities of Issachar given to the Levites for their inheritance (Jos 21:28-29). It is apparently identifiable with Ramoth in 1 Chronicles 6:73 and Remeth in Joshua 19:21. A stele of Pharaoh Seti I was found at Beth-shan, referring to the whole area as Mt Jarmuth.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JARMUTH 1. Fortified city in the northern part of the Shephelah given to Judah’s tribe for an inheritance (Jos 15:35). It was one of five Amorite cities that banded together to attack Gibeon after they had made peace with Joshua and Israel (10:3-5). Jarmuth was reinhabited after the exile by people of Judah (Neh 11:29), and possibly maintained a population throughout the Dispersion. It is identified with Khirbet Yarmuk, 18 miles (29 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem. Archaeological evidence ...","summary_en":"JARMUTH 1. Fortified city in the northern part of the Shephelah given to Judah’s tribe for an inheritance (Jos 15:35). It was one of five Amorite cities that banded together to attack Gibeon after they had made peace with Joshua and Israel (10:3-5). Jarmuth was reinhabited after the exile by people of Judah (Neh 11:29), and possibly maintained a population throughout the Dispersion. It is identified with Khirbet Yarmuk, 18 miles (29 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem. Archaeological evidence ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21232,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Judges","title_en":"Book of Judges","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","summary_en":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30442,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Piram","title_en":"Piram","content_ro":"<h3>PIRAM<\/h3>\n<p>King of Jarmuth, a Canaanite city located southwest of Jerusalem. After joining an alliance with four Amorite kings against Joshua, Piram—along with other kings—was defeated and killed (Jos 10:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PIRAM<\/h3>\n<p>King of Jarmuth, a Canaanite city located southwest of Jerusalem. After joining an alliance with four Amorite kings against Joshua, Piram—along with other kings—was defeated and killed (Jos 10:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PIRAM King of Jarmuth, a Canaanite city located southwest of Jerusalem. After joining an alliance with four Amorite kings against Joshua, Piram—along with other kings—was defeated and killed (Jos 10:3).","summary_en":"PIRAM King of Jarmuth, a Canaanite city located southwest of Jerusalem. After joining an alliance with four Amorite kings against Joshua, Piram—along with other kings—was defeated and killed (Jos 10:3).","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":45454,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:5","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the <em>Amorite kings<\/em> controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the <em>Amorite kings<\/em> controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:5 When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the Amorite kings controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.","summary_en":"10:5 When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the Amorite kings controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73080,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:5","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the <em>Amorite kings<\/em> controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the <em>Amorite kings<\/em> controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:5 When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the Amorite kings controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.","summary_en":"10:5 When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the Amorite kings controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100706,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:5","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the <em>Amorite kings<\/em> controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the <em>Amorite kings<\/em> controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:5 When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the Amorite kings controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.","summary_en":"10:5 When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the Amorite kings controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128332,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:5","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the <em>Amorite kings<\/em> controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:5<\/strong> When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the <em>Amorite kings<\/em> controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:5 When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the Amorite kings controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.","summary_en":"10:5 When the Old Testament makes a distinction between Amorites and Canaanites (see study note on 3:10), the Amorite kings controlled the hill country, while the Canaanites occupied the valleys and the coastal plain.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":629,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adoni-Zedek","title_en":"Adoni-Zedek","content_ro":"<h3>ADONI-ZEDEK<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADONI-ZEDEK<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADONI-ZEDEK Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27). See also Conquest and Allotment of the Land.","summary_en":"ADONI-ZEDEK Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27). See also Conquest and Allotment of the Land.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1419,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Amorites","title_en":"Amorites","content_ro":"<h3>AMORITES<\/h3>\n<p>Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called <em>Amurru<\/em> (translation of the Sumerian <em>Mar-tu<\/em>), perhaps named for a storm god. They overran the Sumerians and eventually most of Mesopotamia. The city of Mari, on the upper Euphrates River, fell to them about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; Eshunna a short time later; Babylon by 1830 <span>BC<\/span>; and finally Assur around 1750 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Farther to the west, Amorites had been in Palestine and Syria as early as the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Egyptian texts of the early part of the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> show that additional waves of Amorite nomads were entering Canaan at that time. Many of their names are similar to the Amorite names from upper Mesopotamia. In fact, many names from the Mari tablets are identical with or similar to names in the patriarchal accounts in Genesis. People named Jacob, Abraham, Levi, and Ishmael were known at Mari, and names similar to Gad and Dan have been found there. Benjamin was known as the name of a tribe. Nahor was found to be the name of a city near Haran. According to Genesis, Abraham lived in Haran many years before going to Canaan. Jacob spent 20 years there and married two women from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Amorites appear prominently in the OT as major obstacles to the occupation of Canaan (the Promised Land) by the Israelites after the exodus. Calling Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt, the Lord spoke of Canaan, then occupied by Amorites and others, as a good land (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, God promised to destroy those nations (Ex 23:23) and drive them out of the land (Ex 33:2). The Hebrew people were warned not to make covenants with any of them, to intermarry with them, or to tolerate their idol worship (Ex 34:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>Spies sent into the land found Amalekites in the south; Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the northern mountains and to the west of the Jordan River; and Canaanites by the sea and along the Jordan (Nm 13:25-29). At that time there were Amorites east of the Jordan as well (Nm 21:13).<\/p>\n<p>God had instructed Israel to go up from Horeb and conquer the mountain Amorites on the west side of the Jordan all the way to the Mediterranean Sea (Dt 1:7). When they arrived at Kadesh-barnea they were at the foot of those mountains (Dt 1:19-20). But the people murmured and complained that God had brought them from Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Amorites. From the spies’ reports, they pictured the Amorites as an awesome people, greater and taller than the Israelites (Dt 1:26-28). At first they refused to trust God enough to go in, so God told them to turn around and head back into the wilderness. Then they changed their minds, stubbornly attacked the Amorites against God’s command, and were badly beaten (Dt 1:34-44). Finally, after 38 additional years in the wilderness, the Israelites once again faced the Amorites, but this time on the east side of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:13). The Amorite king, Sihon, refused to let them pass through his land. The Israelites were drawn up at the Arnon River, which flows into the Dead Sea about two-thirds of the way up its eastern shore.<\/p>\n<p>Transjordan was controlled by two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. Israel had to face Sihon first. His city, Heshbon, lay due east of the north end of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:21-26). Sihon himself had taken this land from the Moabites. Moses knew of Sihon’s reputation and quoted a poem that boasted of Sihon’s victory over Moab (Nm 21:27-30). Nevertheless, the Israelites defeated Sihon and devastated his kingdom from Dibon, four miles (6.4 kilometers) north of the Arnon, to Medeba, seven miles (11.2 kilometers) south of Heshbon. King Og, farther to the north, received the same treatment (Nm 21:31-35). King Balak of Moab heard of the Israelite victories and was terrified (Nm 22:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the people that by relying on God’s promises they had taken all of the land of the Amorites east of the Jordan (Dt 2:24–3:10). The conquered territory was given to the tribes of Gad and Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Nm 32:33). Then, 40 years after the exodus began, Israel was standing on the east side of the Jordan, having dispossessed the two great Amorite nations there (Dt 1:1-4). But there were other Amorite kingdoms in the hills west of the Jordan, along with other nations (Dt 7:1-2). They were to be destroyed in the same way Sihon and Og had been defeated (Dt 31:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>So famous was the victory of Israel east of the Jordan that Rahab and others in Jericho, west of the Jordan, knew of it and were frightened (Jos 2:8-11). The Israelites crossed the Jordan and took Jericho but were defeated at the smaller city of Ai in the hill country west of Jericho. They immediately assumed that they would be wiped out by the Amorites in those hills (Jos 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites regained God’s favor, however, and defeated Ai. Their victory made an impression on the other kingdoms west of the Jordan in the hills, valleys, and coastlands up to Lebanon, who allied to fight Joshua (Jos 9:1-2). Gibeon, an Amorite city seven miles (11.2 kilometers) southwest of Ai, made peace with Israel, putting more fear in the hearts of the remaining kings (Jos 10:1-2). Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, was evidently the leader of the Amorite kings west of the Jordan (Jos 10:3). Jerusalem was only eight miles (12.8 kilometers) southeast of Gibeon. Adoni-zedek called together the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, all within 50 miles (80.4 kilometers) of Jerusalem, to fight against Gibeon and Joshua (Jos 10:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua came to Gibeon’s defense and routed the Amorites, chasing them to the northwest and southwest. The Lord fought for Israel, raining hailstones on the Amorites at Azekah, southwest of Gibeon, and causing the sun to stand still in order to provide a longer battle day (Jos 10:6-14).<\/p>\n<p>In the far north, Jabin, king of Hazor, rallied the Canaanites and remaining Amorites all the way north to Mt Hermon (Jos 11:1-5). But they too were overcome (Jos 11:10-23). Toward the end of Joshua’s career, he reminded the people that it was the Lord who had given them the land of the Amorites (Jos 24:1-18).<\/p>\n<p>After the occupation of Canaan by Israel, Amorites still present in the land chased Dan’s tribe into the mountains and continued to live near Aijalon, 17 miles (27.4 kilometers) west of Jerusalem. They still held the slopes toward the south end of the Dead Sea as well (Jgs 1:34-36). In the period of the judges, the Amorites and their gods posed a constant threat to Israel’s well-being (Jgs 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the period of the judges, relations between Israel and the Amorites improved (1 Sm 7:14). David continued to honor Joshua’s treaty with the Amorite remnant of Gibeon (2 Sm 21:2-6). Solomon conscripted his labor forces from the Amorites and other peoples still surviving from Israelite conquest (1 Kgs 9:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT treats the deliverance of the Amorites and their land into the hands of Israel as a great event comparable with the exodus itself, a victory to be remembered and celebrated (Pss 135:9-12; 136:13-26). If the people forgot, the Lord reminded them through his prophets (Am 2:9-10). Long after Sihon and Og had been defeated, the area east of the Jordan was still remembered as the land of “Sihon king of the Amorites” (1 Kgs 4:19). When the kings of Israel and Judah began to fail God, the memory of the Amorites provided a standard of comparison of evil. The Jews’ continuing fascination with idolatry led God to address Jerusalem, representing the Jewish people, through the prophet Ezekiel: “Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ez 16:45). In the biblical view, the Amorites stood for everything that is abominable in the sight of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AMORITES<\/h3>\n<p>Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called <em>Amurru<\/em> (translation of the Sumerian <em>Mar-tu<\/em>), perhaps named for a storm god. They overran the Sumerians and eventually most of Mesopotamia. The city of Mari, on the upper Euphrates River, fell to them about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; Eshunna a short time later; Babylon by 1830 <span>BC<\/span>; and finally Assur around 1750 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Farther to the west, Amorites had been in Palestine and Syria as early as the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Egyptian texts of the early part of the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> show that additional waves of Amorite nomads were entering Canaan at that time. Many of their names are similar to the Amorite names from upper Mesopotamia. In fact, many names from the Mari tablets are identical with or similar to names in the patriarchal accounts in Genesis. People named Jacob, Abraham, Levi, and Ishmael were known at Mari, and names similar to Gad and Dan have been found there. Benjamin was known as the name of a tribe. Nahor was found to be the name of a city near Haran. According to Genesis, Abraham lived in Haran many years before going to Canaan. Jacob spent 20 years there and married two women from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Amorites appear prominently in the OT as major obstacles to the occupation of Canaan (the Promised Land) by the Israelites after the exodus. Calling Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt, the Lord spoke of Canaan, then occupied by Amorites and others, as a good land (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, God promised to destroy those nations (Ex 23:23) and drive them out of the land (Ex 33:2). The Hebrew people were warned not to make covenants with any of them, to intermarry with them, or to tolerate their idol worship (Ex 34:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>Spies sent into the land found Amalekites in the south; Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the northern mountains and to the west of the Jordan River; and Canaanites by the sea and along the Jordan (Nm 13:25-29). At that time there were Amorites east of the Jordan as well (Nm 21:13).<\/p>\n<p>God had instructed Israel to go up from Horeb and conquer the mountain Amorites on the west side of the Jordan all the way to the Mediterranean Sea (Dt 1:7). When they arrived at Kadesh-barnea they were at the foot of those mountains (Dt 1:19-20). But the people murmured and complained that God had brought them from Egypt only to be slaughtered by the Amorites. From the spies’ reports, they pictured the Amorites as an awesome people, greater and taller than the Israelites (Dt 1:26-28). At first they refused to trust God enough to go in, so God told them to turn around and head back into the wilderness. Then they changed their minds, stubbornly attacked the Amorites against God’s command, and were badly beaten (Dt 1:34-44). Finally, after 38 additional years in the wilderness, the Israelites once again faced the Amorites, but this time on the east side of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:13). The Amorite king, Sihon, refused to let them pass through his land. The Israelites were drawn up at the Arnon River, which flows into the Dead Sea about two-thirds of the way up its eastern shore.<\/p>\n<p>Transjordan was controlled by two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. Israel had to face Sihon first. His city, Heshbon, lay due east of the north end of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:21-26). Sihon himself had taken this land from the Moabites. Moses knew of Sihon’s reputation and quoted a poem that boasted of Sihon’s victory over Moab (Nm 21:27-30). Nevertheless, the Israelites defeated Sihon and devastated his kingdom from Dibon, four miles (6.4 kilometers) north of the Arnon, to Medeba, seven miles (11.2 kilometers) south of Heshbon. King Og, farther to the north, received the same treatment (Nm 21:31-35). King Balak of Moab heard of the Israelite victories and was terrified (Nm 22:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the people that by relying on God’s promises they had taken all of the land of the Amorites east of the Jordan (Dt 2:24–3:10). The conquered territory was given to the tribes of Gad and Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Nm 32:33). Then, 40 years after the exodus began, Israel was standing on the east side of the Jordan, having dispossessed the two great Amorite nations there (Dt 1:1-4). But there were other Amorite kingdoms in the hills west of the Jordan, along with other nations (Dt 7:1-2). They were to be destroyed in the same way Sihon and Og had been defeated (Dt 31:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>So famous was the victory of Israel east of the Jordan that Rahab and others in Jericho, west of the Jordan, knew of it and were frightened (Jos 2:8-11). The Israelites crossed the Jordan and took Jericho but were defeated at the smaller city of Ai in the hill country west of Jericho. They immediately assumed that they would be wiped out by the Amorites in those hills (Jos 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites regained God’s favor, however, and defeated Ai. Their victory made an impression on the other kingdoms west of the Jordan in the hills, valleys, and coastlands up to Lebanon, who allied to fight Joshua (Jos 9:1-2). Gibeon, an Amorite city seven miles (11.2 kilometers) southwest of Ai, made peace with Israel, putting more fear in the hearts of the remaining kings (Jos 10:1-2). Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, was evidently the leader of the Amorite kings west of the Jordan (Jos 10:3). Jerusalem was only eight miles (12.8 kilometers) southeast of Gibeon. Adoni-zedek called together the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, all within 50 miles (80.4 kilometers) of Jerusalem, to fight against Gibeon and Joshua (Jos 10:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua came to Gibeon’s defense and routed the Amorites, chasing them to the northwest and southwest. The Lord fought for Israel, raining hailstones on the Amorites at Azekah, southwest of Gibeon, and causing the sun to stand still in order to provide a longer battle day (Jos 10:6-14).<\/p>\n<p>In the far north, Jabin, king of Hazor, rallied the Canaanites and remaining Amorites all the way north to Mt Hermon (Jos 11:1-5). But they too were overcome (Jos 11:10-23). Toward the end of Joshua’s career, he reminded the people that it was the Lord who had given them the land of the Amorites (Jos 24:1-18).<\/p>\n<p>After the occupation of Canaan by Israel, Amorites still present in the land chased Dan’s tribe into the mountains and continued to live near Aijalon, 17 miles (27.4 kilometers) west of Jerusalem. They still held the slopes toward the south end of the Dead Sea as well (Jgs 1:34-36). In the period of the judges, the Amorites and their gods posed a constant threat to Israel’s well-being (Jgs 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the period of the judges, relations between Israel and the Amorites improved (1 Sm 7:14). David continued to honor Joshua’s treaty with the Amorite remnant of Gibeon (2 Sm 21:2-6). Solomon conscripted his labor forces from the Amorites and other peoples still surviving from Israelite conquest (1 Kgs 9:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT treats the deliverance of the Amorites and their land into the hands of Israel as a great event comparable with the exodus itself, a victory to be remembered and celebrated (Pss 135:9-12; 136:13-26). If the people forgot, the Lord reminded them through his prophets (Am 2:9-10). Long after Sihon and Og had been defeated, the area east of the Jordan was still remembered as the land of “Sihon king of the Amorites” (1 Kgs 4:19). When the kings of Israel and Judah began to fail God, the memory of the Amorites provided a standard of comparison of evil. The Jews’ continuing fascination with idolatry led God to address Jerusalem, representing the Jewish people, through the prophet Ezekiel: “Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ez 16:45). In the biblical view, the Amorites stood for everything that is abominable in the sight of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AMORITES Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium BC. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine. Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called Amurru (translation of the Sumerian Mar-tu), perhap...","summary_en":"AMORITES Semitic people found throughout the Fertile Crescent of the Near East at the beginning of the second millennium BC. Amorites are first mentioned in the Bible as descendants of Canaan in a list of ancient peoples (Gn 10:16; cf. 1 Chr 1:13-16). Some of these nomadic people seem to have migrated from the Syrian Desert into Mesopotamia, others into Palestine. Akkadian cuneiform inscriptions mention a relatively uncivilized people called Amurru (translation of the Sumerian Mar-tu), perhap...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13886,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gilgal","title_en":"Gilgal","content_ro":"<h3>GILGAL<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town near Jericho. Gilgal was assigned to Benjamin’s tribe when Canaan was divided among the tribes of Israel. For many years it was a center of religious, political, and military importance, especially during the periods of the conquest of Canaan and the early monarchy under Saul.<\/li>\n<p>Gilgal was the first place where Israel encamped in Palestine after the miraculous crossing of the Jordan River (Jos 4:19). No doubt the tabernacle was set up here, since Israel occupied Gilgal for some time and used it as the center of the commonwealth. Several significant religious events occurred at Gilgal: the circumcision of all Hebrew males born in the wilderness during the 40 years of wandering (5:2-9), the celebration of the Passover (v 10), the cessation of the manna (v 12), and a divine manifestation to Joshua by the “commander of the army of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Militarily, Gilgal was Israel’s first foothold in Canaan and the base of operations for the Conquest. From here Joshua led Israel to the conquest of Jericho (Jos 6) and Ai (8:3), formed a treaty with the Gibeonites (9:3-15), attacked the five Amorite kings (10:6-43), and launched his northern campaign (ch 11). At Gilgal, Judah, Manasseh, and Ephraim were assigned their portions of Palestine (chs 15–17).<\/p>\n<p>After the relocation of the tabernacle at Shiloh, Gilgal retained its importance to Israel. It was one of the towns visited regularly by Samuel in his annual circuit as judge (1 Sm 7:16) and was one of the primary places for offering sacrifices (10:8; 13:9-10; 15:21). At Gilgal, Saul, a Benjamite, was crowned king (11:14-15), and later rejected (13:4-15; 15:17-31). Here the men of Judah met David returning to Palestine after Absalom’s rebellion (2 Sm 19:15). That Gilgal was still a religious center of some importance as late as the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> is indicated in the denunciation by Hosea and Amos of the sanctuary and sacrificial cult located there (Hos 4:15; 9:15; 12:11; Am 4:4; 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>The exact location of Gilgal is disputed among archaeologists. Some locate it at Khirbet en-Nitleh about two miles (3.2 kilometers) east of modern Jericho. Others prefer Khirbet Mefjir, a mound about one mile (1.6 kilometers) from ancient Jericho (Tell es-Sultan). Joshua 4:19 places it on the eastern border of Jericho, and Josephus gives the distance from the Jordan fording place to Gilgal as 50 stadia (5.8 miles, or 9.3 kilometers), with Gilgal being about 10 stadia from Jericho (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 5.6.4). These distances fit best with Khirbet Mefjir.<\/p>\n<li>2. Place perhaps near Jericho (Dt 11:30); however, the language of the passage implies that it is located in the neighborhood of Mt Ebal and Mt Gerizim.<\/li>\n<li>3. KJV rendering of “Goiim in Galilee” in Joshua 12:23. Although its location is uncertain, the context places it in northern Palestine in the area of Galilee. <em>See<\/em> Goiim #2.<\/li>\n<li>4. Place describing the northern border of Judah (Jos 15:7). It was near Adummim and was perhaps identifiable with Geliloth in Joshua 18:17.<\/li>\n<li>5. Place mentioned in connection with Elijah and Elisha (2 Kgs 2:1; 4:38). It was apparently a town farther from the Jordan River than #1 above. In the story of Elijah’s translation into heaven, he and Elisha were going from Gilgal to Bethel to Jericho. Since the account places Bethel between Gilgal and Jericho, it could not have been the first Gilgal. It may refer to the modern Jiljiliah, a town on top of a hill in central Palestine, about seven miles (11.3 kilometers) north of Bethel.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>GILGAL<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town near Jericho. Gilgal was assigned to Benjamin’s tribe when Canaan was divided among the tribes of Israel. For many years it was a center of religious, political, and military importance, especially during the periods of the conquest of Canaan and the early monarchy under Saul.<\/li>\n<p>Gilgal was the first place where Israel encamped in Palestine after the miraculous crossing of the Jordan River (Jos 4:19). No doubt the tabernacle was set up here, since Israel occupied Gilgal for some time and used it as the center of the commonwealth. Several significant religious events occurred at Gilgal: the circumcision of all Hebrew males born in the wilderness during the 40 years of wandering (5:2-9), the celebration of the Passover (v 10), the cessation of the manna (v 12), and a divine manifestation to Joshua by the “commander of the army of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (vv 13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Militarily, Gilgal was Israel’s first foothold in Canaan and the base of operations for the Conquest. From here Joshua led Israel to the conquest of Jericho (Jos 6) and Ai (8:3), formed a treaty with the Gibeonites (9:3-15), attacked the five Amorite kings (10:6-43), and launched his northern campaign (ch 11). At Gilgal, Judah, Manasseh, and Ephraim were assigned their portions of Palestine (chs 15–17).<\/p>\n<p>After the relocation of the tabernacle at Shiloh, Gilgal retained its importance to Israel. It was one of the towns visited regularly by Samuel in his annual circuit as judge (1 Sm 7:16) and was one of the primary places for offering sacrifices (10:8; 13:9-10; 15:21). At Gilgal, Saul, a Benjamite, was crowned king (11:14-15), and later rejected (13:4-15; 15:17-31). Here the men of Judah met David returning to Palestine after Absalom’s rebellion (2 Sm 19:15). That Gilgal was still a religious center of some importance as late as the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> is indicated in the denunciation by Hosea and Amos of the sanctuary and sacrificial cult located there (Hos 4:15; 9:15; 12:11; Am 4:4; 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>The exact location of Gilgal is disputed among archaeologists. Some locate it at Khirbet en-Nitleh about two miles (3.2 kilometers) east of modern Jericho. Others prefer Khirbet Mefjir, a mound about one mile (1.6 kilometers) from ancient Jericho (Tell es-Sultan). Joshua 4:19 places it on the eastern border of Jericho, and Josephus gives the distance from the Jordan fording place to Gilgal as 50 stadia (5.8 miles, or 9.3 kilometers), with Gilgal being about 10 stadia from Jericho (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 5.6.4). These distances fit best with Khirbet Mefjir.<\/p>\n<li>2. Place perhaps near Jericho (Dt 11:30); however, the language of the passage implies that it is located in the neighborhood of Mt Ebal and Mt Gerizim.<\/li>\n<li>3. KJV rendering of “Goiim in Galilee” in Joshua 12:23. Although its location is uncertain, the context places it in northern Palestine in the area of Galilee. <em>See<\/em> Goiim #2.<\/li>\n<li>4. Place describing the northern border of Judah (Jos 15:7). It was near Adummim and was perhaps identifiable with Geliloth in Joshua 18:17.<\/li>\n<li>5. Place mentioned in connection with Elijah and Elisha (2 Kgs 2:1; 4:38). It was apparently a town farther from the Jordan River than #1 above. In the story of Elijah’s translation into heaven, he and Elisha were going from Gilgal to Bethel to Jericho. Since the account places Bethel between Gilgal and Jericho, it could not have been the first Gilgal. It may refer to the modern Jiljiliah, a town on top of a hill in central Palestine, about seven miles (11.3 kilometers) north of Bethel.<\/li>","summary_ro":"GILGAL 1. Town near Jericho. Gilgal was assigned to Benjamin’s tribe when Canaan was divided among the tribes of Israel. For many years it was a center of religious, political, and military importance, especially during the periods of the conquest of Canaan and the early monarchy under Saul. Gilgal was the first place where Israel encamped in Palestine after the miraculous crossing of the Jordan River (Jos 4:19). No doubt the tabernacle was set up here, since Israel occupied Gilgal for some t...","summary_en":"GILGAL 1. Town near Jericho. Gilgal was assigned to Benjamin’s tribe when Canaan was divided among the tribes of Israel. For many years it was a center of religious, political, and military importance, especially during the periods of the conquest of Canaan and the early monarchy under Saul. Gilgal was the first place where Israel encamped in Palestine after the miraculous crossing of the Jordan River (Jos 4:19). No doubt the tabernacle was set up here, since Israel occupied Gilgal for some t...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20777,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37647,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Travel","title_en":"Travel","content_ro":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinOldTestamentTimes\">Travel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Several accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<p>Examples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinNewTestamentTimes\">Travel in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\n<p>The NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Paul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandSeaLanes\">Roads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\n<p>The roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\n<p>These linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>The roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\n<p>There were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\n<p>Several important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\n<p>In NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\n<p>Ships were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\n<p>The most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\n<p>Military travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Some travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\n<p>People on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinOldTestamentTimes\">Travel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Several accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<p>Examples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinNewTestamentTimes\">Travel in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\n<p>The NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Paul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandSeaLanes\">Roads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\n<p>The roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\n<p>These linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>The roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\n<p>There were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\n<p>Several important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\n<p>In NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\n<p>Ships were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\n<p>The most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\n<p>Military travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Some travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\n<p>People on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","summary_en":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":18005,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"History of Israel","title_en":"History of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>ISRAEL, History of<\/h3>\n<p>An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n<p>• Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Exodus<\/p>\n<p>• Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n<p>• The Conquest<\/p>\n<p>• The Judges<\/p>\n<p>• The United Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>• The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Restoration<\/p>\n<p>• The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n<p>• The Roman Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PatriarchalAge\">Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n<p>The story of Israel begins with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to which God would direct the way. In calling Abraham, God made with him a covenant (Gn 12:1-3) that promised him a land, special divine favor (“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse,” <span>nasb<\/span>), and the privilege of being a channel of blessing to the entire world (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed,” <span>nasb<\/span>). In Genesis 12:4-8 God confirmed this unconditional covenant, promising Abraham this new land forever, along with innumerable descendants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1-21, God again confirmed the covenant but added the significant prediction that the guarantee of holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean occupation of the land in every generation. God also spelled out the limits of the Promised Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, some 500 to 600 miles or 804 to 965 kilometers in extent). A final confirmation of the covenant to Abraham appears in Genesis 17:6-8. It guaranteed the land of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dynasty) would arise in his line. The covenant was confirmed to Abraham’s son Isaac (Gn 26:3-5) and his grandson Jacob (ch 28).<\/p>\n<p>This period is known as the patriarchal age in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patriarchs because they were fathers, not only to their immediate families, but also to the extended family of Hebrews, over which they exercised a fatherly control. They served as political, legal, and spiritual heads of their migratory community, looking after their interests and leading them in worship. Periodically they built altars on which they offered sacrifices. That the patriarchal community was very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, which says that Abraham had 318 armed men in his camp. If one assumes that most of the men were married and had one or more children each, the total extended family may have numbered in excess of 1,000.<\/p>\n<p>Additional developments in the life of Abraham and Jacob were particularly important for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion to obtain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. (This was also the custom of the land.) The son born was named Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abraham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as well as by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise. He holds a special place in Christianity as an example of Christ, through whom all Christians obtain their salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Jacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopotamia for 20 years in the home of his uncle Laban. There he married Leah and Rachel and fathered the sons who became the progenitors of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Palestine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok River (Gn 32), and God changed his name to Israel (“a prince of God,” <span>kjv<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>The patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s entry into Canaan at about 2085 <span>BC<\/span>, when he was 75 years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>. During much of the patriarchal period, Palestine experienced a decline in population and was occupied largely by nomadic or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. After 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled conditions. Shortly thereafter, the Hebrews made the trek into Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SojourninEgypt\">Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n<p>If Jacob and his sons entered Egypt about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, it was the period of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time other migrants from Asia were coming in increasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Goshen, in the eastern delta region, under the protecting care of Joseph, who held a position at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to that of prime minister. As more and more Asiatic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to take over the country—northern Egypt at least. During this same time the Hebrews became increasingly numerous. Some who hold to a different chronology believe the Hebrews were welcomed into Egypt during the days of Hyksos domination (after 1750 <span>BC<\/span>). At any rate, by about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> native Egyptian princes regained control of the country and expelled many of the Asiatics.<\/p>\n<p>In process of time there arose a king over Egypt who “knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8, <span>kjv<\/span>). Very possibly this meant that a native Egyptian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they were apprehensive over the fact that the growing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might jeopardize their own supremacy. But Egyptian measures to subjugate the Hebrews and reduce their birthrate had a reverse effect (Ex 1:12). Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a first-class education, and became a high official of the realm.<\/p>\n<p>At the age of 40, Moses identified himself with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly familiar with the geography and the ways of the wilderness through which he would later lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to oppress the Hebrew people severely until they cried urgently to God for deliverance. In response, God confronted Moses in the famous burning bush experience and called on him to return to Egypt and lead the people back into the land of Canaan (Ex 3–4). He was to have the help of his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheExodus\">The Exodus<\/p>\n<p>Understandably the pharaoh of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews to leave permanently. The value of this great labor force was incalculable. But finally, after suffering a series of ten plagues, lasting perhaps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to let the Hebrews go (Ex 7–12).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues had a theological as well as a practical purpose. They discredited the gods of Egypt and exalted the most high God of heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly discredited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile was worshiped as Hapi, plague one; the frog, worshiped as Heqt, plague two; the bull, worshiped as Ptah, plague five; the sun, worshiped as Amon-Re\/Aton, plague nine). Taken together, they struck a direct blow at the Egyptian pantheon.<\/p>\n<p>Just before the last plague, which was the night in which the death angel invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made the Passover sacrifice according to divine instructions. This involved killing a lamb for each household (unless the household was too small; in that event, households could combine). Anyone who was careless about applying the blood to the doorpost or who rejected this divine provision came under the judgment of God. After the death of the firstborn throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered 600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In addition they took their flocks and herds and personal belongings.<\/p>\n<p>The date they left Egypt is a matter of continuing debate. Traditionally a date of about 1446 <span>BC<\/span> is given for the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the exodus 480 years before construction of the temple started in 966 <span>BC<\/span>) and 1406 <span>BC<\/span> for the Conquest under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any compelling arguments for rejecting that position. But a great many scholars prefer 1275 <span>BC<\/span> for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\n<p>The early date of the exodus would place the later years of the wilderness wanderings and the subsequent conquest of Palestine during the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412–1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate. When the Egyptians did reassert their power, about 1300, they restricted their movements largely to the coastal area, and thus did not come in contact with the Hebrews who were living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildernessWanderings\">Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness wanderings were an important interlude in the history of Israel. During those years, significant and basic institutions came into existence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses delivered to Israel the law, the pattern of the tabernacle (which later became the model for the temple) and orders for its operation, as well as detailed instructions for the priesthood and sacrificial system of worship.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the wanderings was truly a remarkable time. The presence of God was evidenced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. God provided food in the form of manna, periodically provided water by miraculous means, and made sure that clothes did not wear out. In spite of all that, the people murmured and complained continually.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God gave the law (Ex 19:2–24:18), and the people promptly made a commitment to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 25–27, 30–31, 35–40) and established the priesthood (chs 28–29). While Moses was on the mountain receiving God’s revelation, the people grew restless and clamored for gods they could see. Even Aaron was carried away with the idolatrous wave and supervised the casting of a golden calf and building of an altar before it. The fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle worship so readily indicates that paganism must have made deep inroads among them while in captivity (chs 32–34). Moses’ intercessory response to God’s announcement that he would destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a divine determination to execute judgment on only the worst offenders (32:9-14).<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, God revealed the legal and priestly order (Lv 1:1–27:34). Among the divinely appointed institutions described or alluded to in Leviticus are several special days or feasts, including the Sabbath, Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, the Year of Sabbath, and the Year of Jubilee.<\/p>\n<p>After camping at Sinai for about a year, the Israelites got their orders to go forward (Nm 10:11-12). Miriam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron criticized Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punishment as a consequence (ch 12). When the people arrived at Kadesh-barnea, the gate to southern Palestine, they were frightened by the report of most of the spies who had been reconnoitering in Canaan and decided that they should not advance into Canaan. They called for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt. God declared that the entire generation would wander in the wilderness until the adults had died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in favor of invading immediately) would enter the Promised Land (14:26-30). Near the end of the period of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of entering the land by an act of disobedience.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheConquest\">The Conquest<\/p>\n<p>The latter part of the book of Numbers describes how Moses led the Israelites to victory over the peoples living east of the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested permission to settle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so on the condition that they would join the rest of the Israelites in conquering Canaan before settling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a new census of adult males was taken in order to determine the military capabilities of Israel and to provide a basis for equitable division of the land they were about to enter. The number of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm 26:51). The book of Deuteronomy consists primarily of a series of speeches delivered by Moses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the plains of Moab just before his death and the appointment of Joshua as leader.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua lost no time in moving forward. Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to reconnoiter reported a situation quite different from what the Hebrews had experienced at Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the people of Canaan were terrified because they had heard of the numerical strength and victories of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after the spies returned, Joshua moved the people to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to cross over. The waters parted for them here as the Red Sea had parted earlier.<\/p>\n<p>The narrative of conquest that appears in the book of Joshua is not a detailed battle account. It describes a thrust into the middle of Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a northern campaign against Hazor and other towns. The history of Joshua is extremely telescoped, for Joshua’s major military action must have required about six years. Joshua’s friend Caleb was 79 when the Conquest began and 85 after the last great battle with Jabin, king of Hazor (Jos 14:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>When the war was over, major strongholds (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy hands, but the land west of the Jordan was allocated to the nine and a half Hebrew tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was left to the individual tribes in whose land they were located. The Joshua account was not so much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as of God’s faithfulness and intervention on behalf of his people. For example, at Jericho they did not attack but merely followed divine orders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gibeon hailstones killed more Amorites than Israelite soldiers did (Jos 10:7-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheJudges\">The Judges<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died some 30 years after he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and he was followed by a series of divinely appointed leaders who ruled sometimes over the whole of Israel as a loose confederacy and sometimes over one or more tribes. They were judges, civil functionaries, and military leaders all at the same time.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Judges pictures a series of recurring cycles: apostasy from God, punishment in the form of oppression by neighboring tribes, cries to God for relief, release from bondage under the leadership of a judge, and a period of rest from oppression.<\/p>\n<p>Establishment of the chronology of the judges is one of the thorniest problems of Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of 410. The book of Acts gives a total of 450 years from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts 13:19). The difference in Acts may be accounted for by the addition of 40 years of Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years for the period of the judges, about 30 for the Conquest to the judges, and 40 for the wilderness wanderings, means 480 years from 1050 <span>BC<\/span>, the date for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100 years more than even the early date for the exodus. The most probable explanation is that there is some overlap in oppressions and judgeships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah were centered on the eastern frontier, those of Samson in the Philistine plain to the southwest, and those of Deborah and Barak in the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnitedMonarchy\">The United Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>Because of the weakness of Israel resulting from political disunity and the ineptness and corruption of both Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel called for a king to rule over them. This demand was in reality a rejection of the divine plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9-21). The concept of kingship was not new to Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made some very clear statements about it in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.<\/p>\n<p>The first stage of Hebrew monarchy is commonly called the united monarchy because all Israel was ruled by a single king. This period lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 40-year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm 5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).<\/p>\n<p>The people asked for a king, and God granted them one, but not one like those of the surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to be a man who followed God’s dictates in his public and private life, who did not intrude into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did not fall into idolatry, but exerted all his influence to keep the people faithful to God. If he failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk of being deposed by God, of having his line brought to an end, or even of having the people fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this must be kept in mind when evaluating the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings of the divided monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>Saul began well. He won a great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-gilead and showed considerable wisdom in administrative matters. But after about two years he intruded into the priest’s office to offer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction that his kingdom would be taken from him (1 Sm 13:8-14). He would go on to enjoy great military victory and ability as a ruler until about the middle of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>After Saul’s disobedience to God’s command to totally destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repudiated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint David privately as future king of Israel. David’s rise to prominence was spurred by his victory over Goliath and the accompanying defeat of the Philistines. Saul later made David commander of the army, and the young man soon earned a reputation greater than that of the king himself. Saul, who had become increasingly mentally disturbed after his relationship with God was broken, began to make attempts on David’s life, and for the last years of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Meanwhile, the Philistines got completely out of control and finally killed Saul and most of his sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which gave the Philistines control over much of Palestine west of the Jordan (1 Sm 31:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Soon David became king in Judah with his capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ishbosheth, established himself at Mahanaim, east of the Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms existed side by side (2 Sm 2:2-11). But after the Israelite king and his army commander were assassinated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the beginning of his reign (1010–970 <span>BC<\/span>) David completely defeated and subjugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he captured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the united kingdom. During succeeding years, David built up an empire (2 Sm 8:10; 1 Chr 18–19), conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah, and Ammon, so he controlled territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (a branch of the Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he established good relations, if not an alliance, with Tyre. The establishment of David’s empire was possible because of a power vacuum in the Middle East. The Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Hittites, and Assyrians were either decadent or removed from the stage of history. The Phoenicians, a peaceful commercial people, were also free to expand their trade, and they were happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>Without doubt, David was Israel’s greatest king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city of David. When the king wanted to build the temple as God’s house, God replied that his son should do it instead. But God would in a very real sense build David’s house; he made a covenant with David, promising him that his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infinite One who came from the line of David, alone was capable of fulfilling this divine promise (see Lk 1:31-33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-39; 15:14-17).<\/p>\n<p>Like other Oriental monarchs, David fell into the practice of keeping a harem. Scripture names 8 wives and 21 children and refers to other wives and concubines. Such a situation opened the door to family rivalries and questions about succession to the throne. Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try for the throne, but both efforts were squelched. Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife, Bathsheba, became the next king.<\/p>\n<p>Solomon (970–930 <span>BC<\/span>) was a man of peace and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications, and the temple. He fortified cities all over his realm and outfitted cities for his chariot corps and cavalry units. With the help of the Phoenicians, he built a seaport and kept a fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem by enclosing the temple area to the north of David’s city and the southwestern hill now known as Zion. His best-known project was the temple, which took seven years to build. Twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built on the same basic plan; it measured 90 feet (27.4 meters) long and 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide and had magnificent appointments. But he also constructed a palace complex that took 13 years to complete. This included an armory, a throne room, the king’s private residence, and a house for the daughter of pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Apparently much influenced by the spiritual testimony of David and desiring God’s blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning of his reign. God met him there and offered to grant whatever he might request. Solomon asked for understanding and wisdom to govern God’s people (1 Kgs 3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in many administrative decisions and official policies and building plans.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, Solomon did not show such wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines or in excessive expenditures that left the state in serious financial straits. He even erected places of worship for his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idolatries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact, foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be his downfall; before Solomon died, God informed him that for this reason he would divide the kingdom at his death and give most of it to someone other than Solomon’s son. But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line (1 Kgs 11:9-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDividedKingdom\">The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n<p>After the death of Solomon, the Near East was destined to become a very different place. Israel was no longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Empire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian Empires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful in the south, but it would later come under control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These empires exerted great pressure on Israel and dominated one or both of the two Hebrew kingdoms.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Solomon died, his son Rehoboam took the throne and was forced to deal with a rising tide of resentment over the high taxes and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief, all the northern tribes broke away and formed the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Judah, was left with only the territory of Judah and Benjamin. A total of 20 kings ruled in each of the separate kingdoms. While the north had several dynasties and the reigns of kings were generally short, in the south the dynasty of David continued to rule and the reigns were longer.<\/p>\n<h5>The Northern Kingdom<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom lasted from the division in 930 <span>BC<\/span> until its conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing that he would lose the loyalty of the people if they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship, set up a new religion of his own. Instituting calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry drew the condemnation of God and fulfilled the prediction that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out. All his successors are said to have followed in his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war during much of its history—with Judah, Syria, or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>Four other kings of the north require special comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jeroboam II. Omri (885–874 <span>BC<\/span>) must have been an impressive ruler. Generations later, Assyrians still spoke of Israel as the land of Omri. After he had established himself on the throne, he located the permanent capital of the kingdom at Samaria and began the palace complex there. Early in his reign he was successful in conquering Moab, and later he reestablished the good relations with Tyre that existed in the days of David and Solomon. Apparently he established a full alliance and cemented it with the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.<\/p>\n<p>Ahab (874–853 <span>BC<\/span>) was one of the most significant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife, Jezebel, promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship with its religious prostitution, arousing the powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah. Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating the Syrians in major campaigns and participating in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a virtual standstill. He also built extensively at Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as excavations show.<\/p>\n<p>Jehu (841–814 <span>BC<\/span>) was God’s agent for punishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal worship and liquidated literally scores of relatives and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruthless that he killed off the people who knew how to run the government; subsequently, it did not work well. Jehu also was forced to become a vassal to Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>Jeroboam II ruled during most of the first half of the eighth century (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) and brought the kingdom to its greatest extent and prosperity. He, with his contemporary Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land David had once controlled. This was possible because the Assyrians were in a period of decline during most of the first half of the century.<\/p>\n<p>Prophets who were active during the history of the northern kingdom include the nonwriting prophets Elijah and Elisha and the writing prophets Jonah, Amos, and Hosea.<\/p>\n<h5>The Southern Kingdom<\/h5>\n<p>The history of the southern kingdom of Judah was quite different from that of the northern kingdom. The temple was there and so were large numbers of Levites, many of whom came south after the division of the kingdom to protest the idolatry of the north. In addition to this spiritual strength, there was greater political stability and unity, promoted by the fact that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—shared power, and all the kings were of the Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings were good monarchs. There were also periodic religious revivals. God granted the southern kingdom about 100 more years of existence than the north. But Judah, too, fell into idolatry and went into captivity for her sins.<\/p>\n<p>Rehoboam, the first king in the south, is especially remembered because he refused to listen to wise counsel about fiscal matters and perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He is also remembered for his religious policies. After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy to get out of control and brought the judgment of God in the form of an invasion in his fifth year (926 <span>BC<\/span>) by Shishak I of Egypt, resulting in extensive plunder and payment of tribute. Thereafter, he launched an extensive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s invasion did have the effect of producing a partial and temporary spiritual reform, but the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was downward.<\/p>\n<p>Conditions during the reign of his son, Abijam, were worse, but Asa (910–869 <span>BC<\/span>) initiated a religious reform that was effective for most of his reign. When threatened by the northern kingdom during his latter years, however, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to God, and he seems to have defied the prophets of God to his dying day.<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>) was apparently influenced by his father’s early religious devotion, and his reign was characterized by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. However, he seems to have made a full alliance with Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah. This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later with two of his sons when they became kings of Israel. It also opened the door for the introduction of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For his sin Jehoram (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>) suffered internal revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible disease.<\/p>\n<p>After his death, his last remaining son, Ahaziah, ruled less than a year, following the wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died in battle, the queen mother, Athaliah, decided to seize the throne for herself and to secure her power by killing off all those in line to the throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for six years.<\/p>\n<p>When Joash was seven, Jehoiada the high priest arranged his coronation and also the execution of the murderous and idolatrous Athaliah. During his early years when Joash was influenced by good counsel, he did well. But after the middle of his reign (835–796 <span>BC<\/span>), he began to listen to the princes who wanted to restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated. Military reversals brought on economic decline and ultimately the king’s assassination.<\/p>\n<p>His son Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>) started well with victory over Edom and faithfulness to God. But he, too, fell into idolatry and was totally defeated by the northern kingdom, being held prisoner there. At that point his son Uzziah took over (c. 792 <span>BC<\/span>) and began a long and generally successful reign. During the several decades that followed, Assyria was in decline, and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north, Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew holdings so that between them they controlled most of the territory Solomon had ruled.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah (792–740 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to restore the power of Judah rather quickly after his father’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the Philistines in the southwest and the Ammonites across the Jordan; he strengthened his hold on the Edomites. All during his reign economic conditions improved. But at the height of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in the temple. For this he was smitten with leprosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the years 750–740 <span>BC<\/span>, going on to rule alone for about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian power became resurgent.<\/p>\n<p>By and large, Jotham merely carried on the policies of Uzziah. But the administration of his son Ahaz (735–715 <span>BC<\/span>) was very much affected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria wanted him to join in war against Assyria, but he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy. When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her vassal in return for protection. This rash course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah, who was prophet at court (c. 740–700 <span>BC<\/span>). Contemporaneously, the prophet Micah ministered to the common people of Judah. The pro-Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this brought the judgment of God in the form of invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trouble with Assyria. In fact, during this period, Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom (722 <span>BC<\/span>) and removed many of her people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>The next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>), was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel because of her sins, and he determined to launch a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute payments and strike for independence until after Sennacherib came to the throne in Nineveh in 705 <span>BC<\/span>. At first Sennacherib was too preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in 701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial success, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague (Is 36–39). Isaiah stood by the king to reassure and sustain him during this emergency.<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah’s son Manasseh (697–642 <span>BC<\/span>) ruled longer than any other king of Israel or Judah. Unfortunately, he turned his back on his father’s example and caused the people to fall into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he repented of his evil and God restored him to his throne; thereafter, he led some reforms. But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be rescued. His son Amon (642–640 <span>BC<\/span>) reverted to the idolatry he knew in his youth.<\/p>\n<p>The situation was different with Josiah (640–609 <span>BC<\/span>), however. Throughout his reign he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to root out idolatry and to restore the temple and its worship. In 622 <span>BC<\/span> the Book of the Law was found during repair of the temple, and its demands—which had been forgotten—made a great impression on king and people alike. It is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah ministered during Josiah’s reign, as did Nahum and Habakkuk (in all probability).<\/p>\n<p>International conditions were now changing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nineveh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 <span>BC<\/span>. Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt marched north to aid his Assyrian ally. When Josiah tried to stop him, he was killed in battle.<\/p>\n<p>From this point everything was downhill for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was devout, and political power and economic health rapidly declined. The people put one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced him with Jehoiakim (609–598 <span>BC<\/span>), another son of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took tribute and hostages from Jehoiakim, including Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim revolted in 600 <span>BC<\/span>, but Nebuchadnezzar did not come to deal with him personally until 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He died before the Babylonians arrived, and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne in 598 <span>BC<\/span> to rule for only three months before the Babylonians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel was among the many captives taken on that occasion.<\/p>\n<p>The Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youngest son of Josiah, on the throne in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. When he rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and took the city (587 <span>BC<\/span>), destroying it and the temple and carrying off large numbers of people. The judgment of God had finally fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRestoration\">The Restoration<\/p>\n<p>In judgment God remembered mercy. This is evident in individual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of importance in political life, or as numerous other persons became prosperous in the foreign environment. It is evident on the community level as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scattered abroad and to restore an organized society in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Among the exiles, Judaism as a way of life separated from its own political system or cultic center and began to emerge. Jews finally turned their backs on idolatry. And without a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they turned to the divine Scriptures as their rallying point and the foundation of their community. During this period they developed the synagogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and study.<\/p>\n<p>God’s restoration of an organized community to Palestine involved particularly the fortunes of his “anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1). Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 <span>BC<\/span> revolted against the dominant dynasty controlling the Median Empire. After consolidating his hold on the throne, he proceeded to conquer Asia Minor and the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a wise administrator, he permitted the captive peoples to return to their homes and rebuild their communities. Cyrus’s decree to the Jews appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538 <span>BC<\/span>. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64-65).<\/p>\n<p>Under the stresses and strains of reestablishment, the people built their houses but got no further than laying the foundation of a new temple. Finally, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build the house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the second year of Darius I, the Great (520 <span>BC<\/span>; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), and completed the work in his sixth year (515 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of Darius’s son Xerxes (486–465 <span>BC<\/span>), a plot was hatched to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at that time controlled the lands where Jews lived. Fortunately, Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the book of Esther), in his third year (483 <span>BC<\/span>; Est 1:3), went searching for a new queen and chose Esther, who managed to preserve her people.<\/p>\n<p>Xerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>) also figured significantly in Jewish history. In his seventh year (458 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:7), under the leadership of Ezra, a second contingent of Jews returned to Jerusalem. And in Artaxerxes’ 20th year (445 <span>BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to supervise the rebuilding of the walls of the city. Malachi probably wrote his prophecy to the Jews in Jerusalem during the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.<\/p>\n<p>After the fall of Samaria and the captivity of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land intermarried with various pagan groups in the area. Their offspring became the Samaritans, a religious and racial admixture. These people had moved into the vacuum left by the destruction of Judah, and naturally they looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Babylonian Jews into an area they had come to call their own. They did all they could to frustrate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy, and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could muster to prevent the returning Jews from intermarrying with racially mixed people of the land. Such intermarriage would have meant the ultimate absorption and destruction of the Jewish people.<\/p>\n<p>A Samaritan temple was later built on Mt Gerizim (probably during the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>), and it became the center of the Samaritan worship. The hostility between Samaritans and Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4) and exists to the present.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIntertestamentalPeriod\">The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n<p>Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire with lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem threw open their gates in 332 <span>BC<\/span> and capitulated without a fight, Alexander treated them well. After his death in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine passed back and forth among his successors until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish control in 301 <span>BC<\/span>. Thereafter the area remained in Egyptian hands until 198 <span>BC<\/span>. The Ptolemies were tolerant and granted the Jews considerable autonomy, allowing them to develop their unique culture undisturbed as long as they paid their taxes and remained submissive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenistic environment. As a result, a translation of the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was produced there. While the Ptolemies did not force Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenistic ideas.<\/p>\n<p>When Ptolemy V came to the throne as a minor in 203 <span>BC<\/span>, Antiochus III of Syria took advantage of the weakened Egypt and conquered Palestine (198 <span>BC<\/span>). Apparently the Jews hoped to gain something from the change and welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous defeat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190 <span>BC<\/span>. Syria not only lost much territory but also was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereafter, the Jews suffered under great financial burdens, along with other peoples of the empire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 <span>BC<\/span>), decided to launch an effort to achieve greater internal strength and unity within the empire by forcing, among other things, a greater acceptance of Greek culture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily on the monotheistic Jews and incited revolution.<\/p>\n<p>But this does not completely explain the Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 <span>BC<\/span> armed conflict broke out between Jewish factions in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret this as open rebellion and sent an army against the city. His forces demolished part of the city wall and many houses. After this Antiochus decided to suppress Judaism completely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other religious festivals were no longer permitted, and public worship of heathen gods became compulsory.<\/p>\n<p>Some Jews capitulated to Antiochus’s orders or only resisted passively, but a few decided to resist openly. Chief among them were Mattathias and his five sons. After the early death of Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining the right to restore Jewish worship. The rededication of the temple on December 25, 164 <span>BC<\/span>, inaugurated the Festival of Hanukkah (1 Macc 4:36-59). Subsequently, Jonathan and Simon (other sons of Mattathias) continued the struggle until independence was gained in 142 <span>BC<\/span>; this was possible in large part because they saw how to take advantage of the increasing weakness of Syrian rulers and the competition for the royal office.<\/p>\n<p>Simon ruled the Jewish state until his assassination in 134 <span>BC<\/span>, when his son John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>) took over. John Hyrcanus fought successfully in the east, north, and south, gaining land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and subjugating the Idumeans in the south, forcing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobulus ruled for only about a year (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), but he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom. When he died, his widow married his brother Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>). Janneus carried on almost incessant military action during his reign, and by the time of his death had almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>When Janneus died, Alexandra, widow of two kings, took the throne (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>) and her eldest son, Hyrcanus II, became high priest. Her reign was peaceful and prosperous, but when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaigning in the eastern Mediterranean area, were responsible for Roman interference in the region and conquest of Palestine in 63 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRomanPeriod\">The Roman Period<\/p>\n<p>After the Romans took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was confirmed as high priest and was also appointed as ethnarch or political ruler (63–40 <span>BC<\/span>). But Antipater, father of Herod the Great, was the real power behind the throne, and during many of those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to function because of the confusion of the Roman civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome and saw that Roman policies were carried out; he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews of both Palestine and in the Dispersion.<\/p>\n<p>With the support of Mark Antony, Herod managed to get himself appointed king of Judea by the Roman senate in 40 <span>BC<\/span>. But a Parthian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II, last king of the Maccabean family, to rule for three years (40–37 <span>BC<\/span>). Finally, Herod ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4 <span>BC<\/span>. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an excellent ruler from the Roman point of view and earned the title of “Great.” He brought some order to regions east of the Jordan and made possible organization of the Roman province of Arabia. He also furthered the cultural plans of Augustus for development of a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the whole empire.<\/p>\n<p>Herod admired Greek culture and contributed to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch, Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Palestine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Sebastos<\/span> is Greek for “Augustus”) and also constructed the great port of Caesarea. Probably about as large as Manhattan Island, it became the capital of Roman Palestine. Among his many other building projects, remodeling the temple in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, it was not completed until just a few years before its destruction in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The material splendor of Herod’s reign did not win the affection or support of the Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and harmony in his family, among whom there were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithfulness, and murder. He worried about any threat to his rule and cracked down hard to destroy such threats, as is evident from his slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the birth of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, Herod controlled Idumea, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumea, Judea, and Samaria; Antipas, Galilee and Perea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in <span>AD<\/span> 6, and his territory became a Roman province (<span>AD<\/span> 6–41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome. The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Antipas was more successful and built a new capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the emperor’s good pleasure in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and was deposed. Philip was the most effective of the three and ruled until his death in <span>AD<\/span> 34. Philip’s lands were later given to Herod Agrippa I in <span>AD<\/span> 37; the holdings of Antipas were then added in <span>AD<\/span> 39; and in 41 Agrippa also received Samaria, Judea, and Idumea.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44) was the heir of the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mariamne, first wife of Herod the Great), and for this reason had the support of patriotic Jews and of the Pharisees for his observance of divine ordinances. But when he built a new north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in foreign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the Romans; when he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44, they turned the kingdom into a Roman province.<\/p>\n<p>As is clear from the Gospels, several sects had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and were active during the first century. The Zealots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian family and Roman power. The Pharisees were fanatically devoted to the law and were supernaturalists in theological orientation. They were somewhat content to support Rome if given religious freedom, and they dominated the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees were antisupernaturalists, tended to collaborate with the ruling regime, and were dominant in the temple. Generally speaking, the literature of the intertestamental period and the popular mentality of the time tended to view the Messiah as a political deliverer who would free his people from foreign domination and set up a new independent kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Roman prefects ruled Palestine from <span>AD<\/span> 44–66. They had a knack for offending the religious scruples of the Jews and alienating them in other ways. With Felix (<span>AD<\/span> 52–60) there began a constant tension between Jews and Romans that led to the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts 23:23–24:27) about <span>AD<\/span> 58–60, riots broke out there between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (<span>AD<\/span> 60–62; Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the situation was almost out of hand. After he died in office, there was virtual anarchy until his successor, Albinus, arrived (<span>AD<\/span> 62–64). Totally incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was recalled in 64 and replaced by Florus (<span>AD<\/span> 64–66). Florus was even worse, resorting to open robbery and bribery until there was no safety or justice in the land. Finally, the Jews could take no more.<\/p>\n<p>The spark that ignited the fires of rebellion was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic population of Caesarea in <span>AD<\/span> 66. Soon riots spread to numerous cities, and Roman garrisons were massacred in several places. But the Jews were not united, and in Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen to command the Roman army of some 60,000 to deal with the insurrection. He had subjugated most of Palestine by the time he was elevated to the imperial chair in <span>AD<\/span> 69 (after the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in charge of completing the operations. In August of <span>AD<\/span> 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached, many of the people butchered, and the city and the temple leveled. Masada held out until <span>AD<\/span> 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman might. Loss of life and property had been incalculable and indescribable.<\/p>\n<p>On two more occasions the Jews were destined to fight disastrously against the Romans. Under Trajan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in Cyrenaica in <span>AD<\/span> 115 and spread rapidly to Cyprus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation between the Jews and their Hellenistic neighbors, but it developed into a challenge to Roman authority. This was particularly true after the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern frontier when there seemed to be some hope of success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wherever Jews got the upper hand, they perpetrated massacres, and the non-Semitic population retaliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed the rebels and restored order everywhere except Egypt; his successor, Hadrian, was left to accomplish that.<\/p>\n<p>But Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his own, brought on by his law forbidding circumcision (which he considered to be inhumane) and his decision in <span>AD<\/span> 130 to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupiter on the site of the temple of Yahweh. The latter would not only profane the temple site but also would preclude any rebuilding of the Jewish temple.<\/p>\n<p>Leader of this second Jewish revolt was Simeon, prince of Israel, called Bar-Kochba (“Son of the Star”). Both sides fought with such great ferocity for over three years (<span>AD<\/span> 132–135) that the population of Judea was almost exterminated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain of death. Even as late as the fourth century they were permitted to enter only once a year, on the anniversary of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar-Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly within the citadel of the written and oral law, thus separating itself from the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Conquest and Allotment of the Land; David; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; First Jewish Revolt; Jew; Judaism; Moses; Patriarchs, Period of the; Saul #2; Solomon; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ISRAEL, History of<\/h3>\n<p>An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n<p>• Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Exodus<\/p>\n<p>• Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n<p>• The Conquest<\/p>\n<p>• The Judges<\/p>\n<p>• The United Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>• The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Restoration<\/p>\n<p>• The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n<p>• The Roman Period<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PatriarchalAge\">Patriarchal Age<\/p>\n<p>The story of Israel begins with Abraham, whom God called first at Ur, and perhaps later at Haran (Acts 7:2-4), to leave Mesopotamia and go into a land to which God would direct the way. In calling Abraham, God made with him a covenant (Gn 12:1-3) that promised him a land, special divine favor (“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse,” <span>nasb<\/span>), and the privilege of being a channel of blessing to the entire world (“In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed,” <span>nasb<\/span>). In Genesis 12:4-8 God confirmed this unconditional covenant, promising Abraham this new land forever, along with innumerable descendants. Subsequently, in Genesis 15:1-21, God again confirmed the covenant but added the significant prediction that the guarantee of holding Canaan in perpetuity did not mean occupation of the land in every generation. God also spelled out the limits of the Promised Land (from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, some 500 to 600 miles or 804 to 965 kilometers in extent). A final confirmation of the covenant to Abraham appears in Genesis 17:6-8. It guaranteed the land of Canaan to Abraham’s posterity and added that kings (an anticipation of the Davidic dynasty) would arise in his line. The covenant was confirmed to Abraham’s son Isaac (Gn 26:3-5) and his grandson Jacob (ch 28).<\/p>\n<p>This period is known as the patriarchal age in Hebrew history. The patriarchs were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were called patriarchs because they were fathers, not only to their immediate families, but also to the extended family of Hebrews, over which they exercised a fatherly control. They served as political, legal, and spiritual heads of their migratory community, looking after their interests and leading them in worship. Periodically they built altars on which they offered sacrifices. That the patriarchal community was very large can be seen from Genesis 14:14, which says that Abraham had 318 armed men in his camp. If one assumes that most of the men were married and had one or more children each, the total extended family may have numbered in excess of 1,000.<\/p>\n<p>Additional developments in the life of Abraham and Jacob were particularly important for world history. Abraham, frustrated at not having an heir, accepted Sarah’s suggestion to obtain an heir by the slave girl Hagar. (This was also the custom of the land.) The son born was named Ishmael, progenitor of the Arabs. Thus Abraham is revered by Arabs and Muslims as well as by Jews and Christians. He is the father of the Jews through his son Isaac, child of promise. He holds a special place in Christianity as an example of Christ, through whom all Christians obtain their salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Jacob, a scheming scoundrel in his earlier years, wound up in exile in northern Mesopotamia for 20 years in the home of his uncle Laban. There he married Leah and Rachel and fathered the sons who became the progenitors of the 12 tribes of Israel. On his return to Palestine he met God along the banks of the Jabbok River (Gn 32), and God changed his name to Israel (“a prince of God,” <span>kjv<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>The patriarchal period in Canaan lasted for 215 years. One estimate places Abraham’s entry into Canaan at about 2085 <span>BC<\/span>, when he was 75 years of age. Jacob and his sons migrated to Egypt to escape a severe famine in Canaan in about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>. During much of the patriarchal period, Palestine experienced a decline in population and was occupied largely by nomadic or seminomadic tribes. It was relatively easy for the Hebrews to enter such a situation. After 1900 Palestine began to enjoy more settled conditions. Shortly thereafter, the Hebrews made the trek into Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SojourninEgypt\">Sojourn in Egypt<\/p>\n<p>If Jacob and his sons entered Egypt about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, it was the period of the Middle Kingdom. And by that time other migrants from Asia were coming in increasing numbers. The Hebrews settled in Goshen, in the eastern delta region, under the protecting care of Joseph, who held a position at the Egyptian court roughly equivalent to that of prime minister. As more and more Asiatic Hyksos came into Egypt, they began to take over the country—northern Egypt at least. During this same time the Hebrews became increasingly numerous. Some who hold to a different chronology believe the Hebrews were welcomed into Egypt during the days of Hyksos domination (after 1750 <span>BC<\/span>). At any rate, by about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> native Egyptian princes regained control of the country and expelled many of the Asiatics.<\/p>\n<p>In process of time there arose a king over Egypt who “knew not Joseph” (Ex 1:8, <span>kjv<\/span>). Very possibly this meant that a native Egyptian dynasty had arisen in Egypt and they were apprehensive over the fact that the growing numbers and wealth of the Hebrews might jeopardize their own supremacy. But Egyptian measures to subjugate the Hebrews and reduce their birthrate had a reverse effect (Ex 1:12). Finally, the Egyptians ordered the killing of all male Hebrew infants at birth. Among those who disobeyed were the parents of Moses, who set him afloat in a waterproof basket made of reeds. Found by a daughter of Pharaoh, he was brought up in the Egyptian court, was given a first-class education, and became a high official of the realm.<\/p>\n<p>At the age of 40, Moses identified himself with his own people. He killed an Egyptian in defense of a fellow Hebrew, and immediately fled to the land of Midian in the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. He married and lived there for 40 years, becoming thoroughly familiar with the geography and the ways of the wilderness through which he would later lead the Hebrews. The Egyptians continued to oppress the Hebrew people severely until they cried urgently to God for deliverance. In response, God confronted Moses in the famous burning bush experience and called on him to return to Egypt and lead the people back into the land of Canaan (Ex 3–4). He was to have the help of his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheExodus\">The Exodus<\/p>\n<p>Understandably the pharaoh of Egypt was reluctant to permit the Hebrews to leave permanently. The value of this great labor force was incalculable. But finally, after suffering a series of ten plagues, lasting perhaps a year, the Egyptians were persuaded to let the Hebrews go (Ex 7–12).<\/p>\n<p>The plagues had a theological as well as a practical purpose. They discredited the gods of Egypt and exalted the most high God of heaven (Ex 12:12). The plagues clearly discredited specific gods of Egypt (e.g., the Nile was worshiped as Hapi, plague one; the frog, worshiped as Heqt, plague two; the bull, worshiped as Ptah, plague five; the sun, worshiped as Amon-Re\/Aton, plague nine). Taken together, they struck a direct blow at the Egyptian pantheon.<\/p>\n<p>Just before the last plague, which was the night in which the death angel invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites made the Passover sacrifice according to divine instructions. This involved killing a lamb for each household (unless the household was too small; in that event, households could combine). Anyone who was careless about applying the blood to the doorpost or who rejected this divine provision came under the judgment of God. After the death of the firstborn throughout the land, the Egyptians begged the Hebrews to leave. Their company numbered 600,000 men over 20 years of age, plus women and children, for a total of over 2,500,000. In addition they took their flocks and herds and personal belongings.<\/p>\n<p>The date they left Egypt is a matter of continuing debate. Traditionally a date of about 1446 <span>BC<\/span> is given for the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs 6:1, which places the exodus 480 years before construction of the temple started in 966 <span>BC<\/span>) and 1406 <span>BC<\/span> for the Conquest under Joshua, and there do not seem to be any compelling arguments for rejecting that position. But a great many scholars prefer 1275 <span>BC<\/span> for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\n<p>The early date of the exodus would place the later years of the wilderness wanderings and the subsequent conquest of Palestine during the reigns of Amenhotep III and IV (1412–1366), a time when the pharaohs allowed Egyptian control of Palestine to disintegrate. When the Egyptians did reassert their power, about 1300, they restricted their movements largely to the coastal area, and thus did not come in contact with the Hebrews who were living in the hill country of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildernessWanderings\">Wilderness Wanderings<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness wanderings were an important interlude in the history of Israel. During those years, significant and basic institutions came into existence at God’s command. At Sinai, Moses delivered to Israel the law, the pattern of the tabernacle (which later became the model for the temple) and orders for its operation, as well as detailed instructions for the priesthood and sacrificial system of worship.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the wanderings was truly a remarkable time. The presence of God was evidenced by a pillar of cloud that hovered over the people by day and a pillar of fire by night. God provided food in the form of manna, periodically provided water by miraculous means, and made sure that clothes did not wear out. In spite of all that, the people murmured and complained continually.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God gave the law (Ex 19:2–24:18), and the people promptly made a commitment to keep it (24:3). Then God gave the pattern for the tabernacle and its furniture (chs 25–27, 30–31, 35–40) and established the priesthood (chs 28–29). While Moses was on the mountain receiving God’s revelation, the people grew restless and clamored for gods they could see. Even Aaron was carried away with the idolatrous wave and supervised the casting of a golden calf and building of an altar before it. The fact that they turned to Egyptian cattle worship so readily indicates that paganism must have made deep inroads among them while in captivity (chs 32–34). Moses’ intercessory response to God’s announcement that he would destroy Israel because of her idolatry led to a divine determination to execute judgment on only the worst offenders (32:9-14).<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, God revealed the legal and priestly order (Lv 1:1–27:34). Among the divinely appointed institutions described or alluded to in Leviticus are several special days or feasts, including the Sabbath, Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, the Year of Sabbath, and the Year of Jubilee.<\/p>\n<p>After camping at Sinai for about a year, the Israelites got their orders to go forward (Nm 10:11-12). Miriam (Moses’ sister) and Aaron criticized Moses’ leadership and suffered divine punishment as a consequence (ch 12). When the people arrived at Kadesh-barnea, the gate to southern Palestine, they were frightened by the report of most of the spies who had been reconnoitering in Canaan and decided that they should not advance into Canaan. They called for a new leader to bring them back to Egypt. God declared that the entire generation would wander in the wilderness until the adults had died. Only Joshua and Caleb (the two spies in favor of invading immediately) would enter the Promised Land (14:26-30). Near the end of the period of wandering, Moses also lost the privilege of entering the land by an act of disobedience.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheConquest\">The Conquest<\/p>\n<p>The latter part of the book of Numbers describes how Moses led the Israelites to victory over the peoples living east of the Jordan River. Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested permission to settle there and reluctantly were allowed to do so on the condition that they would join the rest of the Israelites in conquering Canaan before settling down. Prior to victories in Transjordan, a new census of adult males was taken in order to determine the military capabilities of Israel and to provide a basis for equitable division of the land they were about to enter. The number of males above 20 years of age was 601,730 (Nm 26:51). The book of Deuteronomy consists primarily of a series of speeches delivered by Moses in a covenant renewal ceremony on the plains of Moab just before his death and the appointment of Joshua as leader.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua lost no time in moving forward. Spies sent across the Jordan to Jericho to reconnoiter reported a situation quite different from what the Hebrews had experienced at Kadesh-barnea a generation earlier. Now the people of Canaan were terrified because they had heard of the numerical strength and victories of the Hebrews. Apparently the day after the spies returned, Joshua moved the people to the edge of the Jordan and prepared to cross over. The waters parted for them here as the Red Sea had parted earlier.<\/p>\n<p>The narrative of conquest that appears in the book of Joshua is not a detailed battle account. It describes a thrust into the middle of Palestine around Jericho and Ai, a southerly drive to defeat the Amorite league, and a northern campaign against Hazor and other towns. The history of Joshua is extremely telescoped, for Joshua’s major military action must have required about six years. Joshua’s friend Caleb was 79 when the Conquest began and 85 after the last great battle with Jabin, king of Hazor (Jos 14:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>When the war was over, major strongholds (e.g., Jerusalem) still remained in enemy hands, but the land west of the Jordan was allocated to the nine and a half Hebrew tribes. The task of reducing enemy towns was left to the individual tribes in whose land they were located. The Joshua account was not so much a narrative of Israelite battle prowess as of God’s faithfulness and intervention on behalf of his people. For example, at Jericho they did not attack but merely followed divine orders and watched the defenses collapse; at Gibeon hailstones killed more Amorites than Israelite soldiers did (Jos 10:7-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheJudges\">The Judges<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died some 30 years after he had led the Hebrews into Canaan, and he was followed by a series of divinely appointed leaders who ruled sometimes over the whole of Israel as a loose confederacy and sometimes over one or more tribes. They were judges, civil functionaries, and military leaders all at the same time.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Judges pictures a series of recurring cycles: apostasy from God, punishment in the form of oppression by neighboring tribes, cries to God for relief, release from bondage under the leadership of a judge, and a period of rest from oppression.<\/p>\n<p>Establishment of the chronology of the judges is one of the thorniest problems of Scripture. Adding up all years of oppression and rest mentioned in the book gives a total of 410. The book of Acts gives a total of 450 years from the days of Joshua to Samuel (Acts 13:19). The difference in Acts may be accounted for by the addition of 40 years of Eli’s ministry (1 Sm 4:18). Allowing 410 years for the period of the judges, about 30 for the Conquest to the judges, and 40 for the wilderness wanderings, means 480 years from 1050 <span>BC<\/span>, the date for Saul’s kingship, and would give a date of about 1530 for the exodus. This is about 100 years more than even the early date for the exodus. The most probable explanation is that there is some overlap in oppressions and judgeships. For instance, the activities of Jephthah were centered on the eastern frontier, those of Samson in the Philistine plain to the southwest, and those of Deborah and Barak in the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnitedMonarchy\">The United Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>Because of the weakness of Israel resulting from political disunity and the ineptness and corruption of both Eli’s and Samuel’s sons, the people of Israel called for a king to rule over them. This demand was in reality a rejection of the divine plan of theocracy—the rule of God. God granted the Hebrews’ wish but warned them of the disadvantages of monarchy (1 Sm 8:9-21). The concept of kingship was not new to Israel. It had been hinted at in Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24:17, and Moses had made some very clear statements about it in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.<\/p>\n<p>The first stage of Hebrew monarchy is commonly called the united monarchy because all Israel was ruled by a single king. This period lasted for 120 years—encompassing the 40-year reigns of Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Sm 5:5), and Solomon (1 Kgs 11:42).<\/p>\n<p>The people asked for a king, and God granted them one, but not one like those of the surrounding nations. The Hebrew king was to be a man who followed God’s dictates in his public and private life, who did not intrude into the affairs of the priesthood, and who did not fall into idolatry, but exerted all his influence to keep the people faithful to God. If he failed in any of these respects, he ran the risk of being deposed by God, of having his line brought to an end, or even of having the people fall into captivity to a foreign power. All this must be kept in mind when evaluating the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and the kings of the divided monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>Saul began well. He won a great victory over the Ammonites at Jabesh-gilead and showed considerable wisdom in administrative matters. But after about two years he intruded into the priest’s office to offer sacrifice, bringing the divine prediction that his kingdom would be taken from him (1 Sm 13:8-14). He would go on to enjoy great military victory and ability as a ruler until about the middle of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>After Saul’s disobedience to God’s command to totally destroy the Amalekites, the Lord repudiated Saul and instructed Samuel to anoint David privately as future king of Israel. David’s rise to prominence was spurred by his victory over Goliath and the accompanying defeat of the Philistines. Saul later made David commander of the army, and the young man soon earned a reputation greater than that of the king himself. Saul, who had become increasingly mentally disturbed after his relationship with God was broken, began to make attempts on David’s life, and for the last years of Saul’s reign David lived as a fugitive. Meanwhile, the Philistines got completely out of control and finally killed Saul and most of his sons in the great battle of Mt Gilboa, which gave the Philistines control over much of Palestine west of the Jordan (1 Sm 31:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Soon David became king in Judah with his capital in Hebron. A son of Saul, Ishbosheth, established himself at Mahanaim, east of the Jordan. For seven years the two tiny kingdoms existed side by side (2 Sm 2:2-11). But after the Israelite king and his army commander were assassinated, David became ruler of a united Hebrew kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the beginning of his reign (1010–970 <span>BC<\/span>) David completely defeated and subjugated the Philistines. Soon thereafter he captured Jerusalem, making it the capital of the united kingdom. During succeeding years, David built up an empire (2 Sm 8:10; 1 Chr 18–19), conquering Moab, Edom, Damascus, Zobah, and Ammon, so he controlled territory from the Gulf of Aqaba (a branch of the Red Sea) and the Sinai in the south almost to the Euphrates in the north. Moreover, he established good relations, if not an alliance, with Tyre. The establishment of David’s empire was possible because of a power vacuum in the Middle East. The Egyptians, Mycenaeans, Hittites, and Assyrians were either decadent or removed from the stage of history. The Phoenicians, a peaceful commercial people, were also free to expand their trade, and they were happy to sell cedar to David for his palace and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>Without doubt, David was Israel’s greatest king. Jerusalem came to be known as the city of David. When the king wanted to build the temple as God’s house, God replied that his son should do it instead. But God would in a very real sense build David’s house; he made a covenant with David, promising him that his house (dynasty, kingdom, throne) would be established forever (2 Sm 7). Christ, the infinite One who came from the line of David, alone was capable of fulfilling this divine promise (see Lk 1:31-33; Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-39; 15:14-17).<\/p>\n<p>Like other Oriental monarchs, David fell into the practice of keeping a harem. Scripture names 8 wives and 21 children and refers to other wives and concubines. Such a situation opened the door to family rivalries and questions about succession to the throne. Two sons, Absalom and Adonijah, made a try for the throne, but both efforts were squelched. Solomon, son of David’s favorite wife, Bathsheba, became the next king.<\/p>\n<p>Solomon (970–930 <span>BC<\/span>) was a man of peace and a builder of palaces, cities, fortifications, and the temple. He fortified cities all over his realm and outfitted cities for his chariot corps and cavalry units. With the help of the Phoenicians, he built a seaport and kept a fleet at Ezion-geber, near modern Eilat on the Gulf of Aqaba. He greatly enlarged Jerusalem by enclosing the temple area to the north of David’s city and the southwestern hill now known as Zion. His best-known project was the temple, which took seven years to build. Twice the size of the tabernacle, it was built on the same basic plan; it measured 90 feet (27.4 meters) long and 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide and had magnificent appointments. But he also constructed a palace complex that took 13 years to complete. This included an armory, a throne room, the king’s private residence, and a house for the daughter of pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Apparently much influenced by the spiritual testimony of David and desiring God’s blessing on his rule, Solomon made a great sacrifice to God at Gibeon near the beginning of his reign. God met him there and offered to grant whatever he might request. Solomon asked for understanding and wisdom to govern God’s people (1 Kgs 3:9). His God-given wisdom is apparent in many administrative decisions and official policies and building plans.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, Solomon did not show such wisdom in maintaining a harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines or in excessive expenditures that left the state in serious financial straits. He even erected places of worship for his foreign wives, thus subsidizing their idolatries and incurring the wrath of God. In fact, foreign wives and their idolatry proved to be his downfall; before Solomon died, God informed him that for this reason he would divide the kingdom at his death and give most of it to someone other than Solomon’s son. But for David’s sake, God would keep Judah and Jerusalem in the hands of the Davidic line (1 Kgs 11:9-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDividedKingdom\">The Divided Kingdom<\/p>\n<p>After the death of Solomon, the Near East was destined to become a very different place. Israel was no longer in a power vacuum. The Assyrian Empire rose in Mesopotamia, to be followed by the Neo-Babylonian and the Medo-Persian Empires in turn. Egypt was temporarily powerful in the south, but it would later come under control of Assyria and Medo-Persia. These empires exerted great pressure on Israel and dominated one or both of the two Hebrew kingdoms.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Solomon died, his son Rehoboam took the throne and was forced to deal with a rising tide of resentment over the high taxes and economic stagnation of Solomon’s last years. When Rehoboam refused to give relief, all the northern tribes broke away and formed the northern kingdom, Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam. The southern kingdom, Judah, was left with only the territory of Judah and Benjamin. A total of 20 kings ruled in each of the separate kingdoms. While the north had several dynasties and the reigns of kings were generally short, in the south the dynasty of David continued to rule and the reigns were longer.<\/p>\n<h5>The Northern Kingdom<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom lasted from the division in 930 <span>BC<\/span> until its conquest by Assyria in 722. Jeroboam, fearing that he would lose the loyalty of the people if they continued to go to Jerusalem to worship, set up a new religion of his own. Instituting calf worship, he built shrines at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south. This idolatry drew the condemnation of God and fulfilled the prediction that Jeroboam’s line would be wiped out. All his successors are said to have followed in his idolatrous steps. Israel found itself at war during much of its history—with Judah, Syria, or Assyria. Jeroboam established his capital first at Shechem and later at Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>Four other kings of the north require special comment: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, and Jeroboam II. Omri (885–874 <span>BC<\/span>) must have been an impressive ruler. Generations later, Assyrians still spoke of Israel as the land of Omri. After he had established himself on the throne, he located the permanent capital of the kingdom at Samaria and began the palace complex there. Early in his reign he was successful in conquering Moab, and later he reestablished the good relations with Tyre that existed in the days of David and Solomon. Apparently he established a full alliance and cemented it with the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, a princess of Tyre.<\/p>\n<p>Ahab (874–853 <span>BC<\/span>) was one of the most significant of Israel’s kings. He and his wife, Jezebel, promoted the vile idolatry of Baal worship with its religious prostitution, arousing the powerful opposition of the prophet Elijah. Ahab was a formidable military man, defeating the Syrians in major campaigns and participating in a coalition that fought the Assyrians to a virtual standstill. He also built extensively at Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and other towns, as excavations show.<\/p>\n<p>Jehu (841–814 <span>BC<\/span>) was God’s agent for punishing the house of Omri and destroying Baal worship in Israel. He did eradicate Baal worship and liquidated literally scores of relatives and court officials of Ahab. But he was so ruthless that he killed off the people who knew how to run the government; subsequently, it did not work well. Jehu also was forced to become a vassal to Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>Jeroboam II ruled during most of the first half of the eighth century (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) and brought the kingdom to its greatest extent and prosperity. He, with his contemporary Uzziah in the south, ruled most of the land David had once controlled. This was possible because the Assyrians were in a period of decline during most of the first half of the century.<\/p>\n<p>Prophets who were active during the history of the northern kingdom include the nonwriting prophets Elijah and Elisha and the writing prophets Jonah, Amos, and Hosea.<\/p>\n<h5>The Southern Kingdom<\/h5>\n<p>The history of the southern kingdom of Judah was quite different from that of the northern kingdom. The temple was there and so were large numbers of Levites, many of whom came south after the division of the kingdom to protest the idolatry of the north. In addition to this spiritual strength, there was greater political stability and unity, promoted by the fact that only two tribes—Judah and Benjamin—shared power, and all the kings were of the Davidic dynasty. Moreover, eight of the kings were good monarchs. There were also periodic religious revivals. God granted the southern kingdom about 100 more years of existence than the north. But Judah, too, fell into idolatry and went into captivity for her sins.<\/p>\n<p>Rehoboam, the first king in the south, is especially remembered because he refused to listen to wise counsel about fiscal matters and perpetrated the division of the kingdom. He is also remembered for his religious policies. After a good beginning, he allowed apostasy to get out of control and brought the judgment of God in the form of an invasion in his fifth year (926 <span>BC<\/span>) by Shishak I of Egypt, resulting in extensive plunder and payment of tribute. Thereafter, he launched an extensive program to fortify the realm. Shishak’s invasion did have the effect of producing a partial and temporary spiritual reform, but the general trend of Rehoboam’s reign was downward.<\/p>\n<p>Conditions during the reign of his son, Abijam, were worse, but Asa (910–869 <span>BC<\/span>) initiated a religious reform that was effective for most of his reign. When threatened by the northern kingdom during his latter years, however, Asa turned to Syria for help instead of to God, and he seems to have defied the prophets of God to his dying day.<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (872–848 <span>BC<\/span>) was apparently influenced by his father’s early religious devotion, and his reign was characterized by faithfulness, winning the favor of God. However, he seems to have made a full alliance with Ahab of Israel, which resulted in the marriage of his son Jehoram to Ahab’s daughter Athaliah. This alliance involved Jehoshaphat in almost ruinous joint ventures with Ahab, and later with two of his sons when they became kings of Israel. It also opened the door for the introduction of Baal worship into Judah when Jehoram came to the throne in the southern kingdom. For his sin Jehoram (853–841 <span>BC<\/span>) suffered internal revolt, invasion, and death from a horrible disease.<\/p>\n<p>After his death, his last remaining son, Ahaziah, ruled less than a year, following the wicked ways of his father. When Ahaziah died in battle, the queen mother, Athaliah, decided to seize the throne for herself and to secure her power by killing off all those in line to the throne. But she missed Ahaziah’s infant son Joash, who was kept hidden in the temple for six years.<\/p>\n<p>When Joash was seven, Jehoiada the high priest arranged his coronation and also the execution of the murderous and idolatrous Athaliah. During his early years when Joash was influenced by good counsel, he did well. But after the middle of his reign (835–796 <span>BC<\/span>), he began to listen to the princes who wanted to restore idolatry, and conditions deteriorated. Military reversals brought on economic decline and ultimately the king’s assassination.<\/p>\n<p>His son Amaziah (796–767 <span>BC<\/span>) started well with victory over Edom and faithfulness to God. But he, too, fell into idolatry and was totally defeated by the northern kingdom, being held prisoner there. At that point his son Uzziah took over (c. 792 <span>BC<\/span>) and began a long and generally successful reign. During the several decades that followed, Assyria was in decline, and Uzziah and his contemporary in the north, Jeroboam II, were able to expand Hebrew holdings so that between them they controlled most of the territory Solomon had ruled.<\/p>\n<p>Uzziah (792–740 <span>BC<\/span>) was able to restore the power of Judah rather quickly after his father’s defeat by Israel. Then he subjugated the Philistines in the southwest and the Ammonites across the Jordan; he strengthened his hold on the Edomites. All during his reign economic conditions improved. But at the height of his power Uzziah foolishly violated the high priest’s prerogatives and offered sacrifice in the temple. For this he was smitten with leprosy; his son Jotham was co-regent during the years 750–740 <span>BC<\/span>, going on to rule alone for about five more years. Meanwhile, Assyrian power became resurgent.<\/p>\n<p>By and large, Jotham merely carried on the policies of Uzziah. But the administration of his son Ahaz (735–715 <span>BC<\/span>) was very much affected by the Assyrian threat. Israel and Syria wanted him to join in war against Assyria, but he refused, being pro-Assyrian in sympathy. When Israel and Syria invaded Judah, King Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria and became her vassal in return for protection. This rash course of action was vainly opposed by Isaiah, who was prophet at court (c. 740–700 <span>BC<\/span>). Contemporaneously, the prophet Micah ministered to the common people of Judah. The pro-Assyrian policy of Ahaz was accompanied by a renewed sympathy for idolatry, and this brought the judgment of God in the form of invasion by Edomites and Philistines and trouble with Assyria. In fact, during this period, Assyria had annexed the northern kingdom (722 <span>BC<\/span>) and removed many of her people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>The next king of Judah, Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>), was greatly sobered by the fall of Israel because of her sins, and he determined to launch a reform in his realm. He was anti-Assyrian too, but he did not dare to discontinue tribute payments and strike for independence until after Sennacherib came to the throne in Nineveh in 705 <span>BC<\/span>. At first Sennacherib was too preoccupied to attend to Judah, but finally in 701 he invaded. Despite tremendous initial success, he was stopped by a divinely sent plague (Is 36–39). Isaiah stood by the king to reassure and sustain him during this emergency.<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah’s son Manasseh (697–642 <span>BC<\/span>) ruled longer than any other king of Israel or Judah. Unfortunately, he turned his back on his father’s example and caused the people to fall into gross idolatry (2 Kgs 21:9). Carried away captive by the Assyrians late in his reign, he repented of his evil and God restored him to his throne; thereafter, he led some reforms. But the land was too steeped in iniquity to be rescued. His son Amon (642–640 <span>BC<\/span>) reverted to the idolatry he knew in his youth.<\/p>\n<p>The situation was different with Josiah (640–609 <span>BC<\/span>), however. Throughout his reign he dedicated himself to reform. He sought to root out idolatry and to restore the temple and its worship. In 622 <span>BC<\/span> the Book of the Law was found during repair of the temple, and its demands—which had been forgotten—made a great impression on king and people alike. It is certain that Jeremiah and Zephaniah ministered during Josiah’s reign, as did Nahum and Habakkuk (in all probability).<\/p>\n<p>International conditions were now changing rapidly. Assyria was declining, and Nineveh fell to Babylon and the Medes in 612 <span>BC<\/span>. Three years later Pharaoh Neco of Egypt marched north to aid his Assyrian ally. When Josiah tried to stop him, he was killed in battle.<\/p>\n<p>From this point everything was downhill for Judah. None of the rest of the kings was devout, and political power and economic health rapidly declined. The people put one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoahaz, on the throne. He lasted three months. Pharaoh Neco replaced him with Jehoiakim (609–598 <span>BC<\/span>), another son of Josiah. In 605 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon defeated Neco, invaded Judah, and took tribute and hostages from Jehoiakim, including Daniel and his friends (Dn 1:1). Jehoiakim revolted in 600 <span>BC<\/span>, but Nebuchadnezzar did not come to deal with him personally until 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He died before the Babylonians arrived, and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne in 598 <span>BC<\/span> to rule for only three months before the Babylonians carried him away into exile. Ezekiel was among the many captives taken on that occasion.<\/p>\n<p>The Babylonians then put Zedekiah, youngest son of Josiah, on the throne in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. When he rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Jerusalem and took the city (587 <span>BC<\/span>), destroying it and the temple and carrying off large numbers of people. The judgment of God had finally fallen on the Jews for their idolatrous ways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRestoration\">The Restoration<\/p>\n<p>In judgment God remembered mercy. This is evident in individual lives, when faithful ones like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah rose to a position of importance in political life, or as numerous other persons became prosperous in the foreign environment. It is evident on the community level as God moved to protect Hebrew enclaves scattered abroad and to restore an organized society in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Among the exiles, Judaism as a way of life separated from its own political system or cultic center and began to emerge. Jews finally turned their backs on idolatry. And without a temple, priesthood, king, or land, they turned to the divine Scriptures as their rallying point and the foundation of their community. During this period they developed the synagogue as a place for fellowship, prayer, and study.<\/p>\n<p>God’s restoration of an organized community to Palestine involved particularly the fortunes of his “anointed” Cyrus (Is 44:28; 45:1). Cyrus was a Persian prince who in 559 <span>BC<\/span> revolted against the dominant dynasty controlling the Median Empire. After consolidating his hold on the throne, he proceeded to conquer Asia Minor and the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a humane man and a wise administrator, he permitted the captive peoples to return to their homes and rebuild their communities. Cyrus’s decree to the Jews appears in Ezra 1 and dates probably to 538 <span>BC<\/span>. A total of almost 50,000 went back to Judah as a result of this edict (Ezr 2:64-65).<\/p>\n<p>Under the stresses and strains of reestablishment, the people built their houses but got no further than laying the foundation of a new temple. Finally, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build the house of God (Ezr 5:1). They began in the second year of Darius I, the Great (520 <span>BC<\/span>; Hg 1:1; Zec 1:1), and completed the work in his sixth year (515 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 6:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of Darius’s son Xerxes (486–465 <span>BC<\/span>), a plot was hatched to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian Empire, which at that time controlled the lands where Jews lived. Fortunately, Xerxes (Ahasuerus in the book of Esther), in his third year (483 <span>BC<\/span>; Est 1:3), went searching for a new queen and chose Esther, who managed to preserve her people.<\/p>\n<p>Xerxes’ son Artaxerxes I (465–424 <span>BC<\/span>) also figured significantly in Jewish history. In his seventh year (458 <span>BC<\/span>; Ezr 7:7), under the leadership of Ezra, a second contingent of Jews returned to Jerusalem. And in Artaxerxes’ 20th year (445 <span>BC<\/span>; Neh 2:1), Nehemiah went to Jerusalem to supervise the rebuilding of the walls of the city. Malachi probably wrote his prophecy to the Jews in Jerusalem during the latter part of Artaxerxes’ reign.<\/p>\n<p>After the fall of Samaria and the captivity of Judah, the Hebrews remaining in the land intermarried with various pagan groups in the area. Their offspring became the Samaritans, a religious and racial admixture. These people had moved into the vacuum left by the destruction of Judah, and naturally they looked with disfavor on an intrusion of Babylonian Jews into an area they had come to call their own. They did all they could to frustrate the efforts of Nehemiah to rebuild the walls. It took all the courage, tact, energy, and persuasiveness Ezra and Nehemiah could muster to prevent the returning Jews from intermarrying with racially mixed people of the land. Such intermarriage would have meant the ultimate absorption and destruction of the Jewish people.<\/p>\n<p>A Samaritan temple was later built on Mt Gerizim (probably during the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>), and it became the center of the Samaritan worship. The hostility between Samaritans and Jews continued on into the NT period (Jn 4) and exists to the present.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIntertestamentalPeriod\">The Intertestamental Period<\/p>\n<p>Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire with lightning speed. When the people of Jerusalem threw open their gates in 332 <span>BC<\/span> and capitulated without a fight, Alexander treated them well. After his death in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine passed back and forth among his successors until Ptolemy I of Egypt managed to establish control in 301 <span>BC<\/span>. Thereafter the area remained in Egyptian hands until 198 <span>BC<\/span>. The Ptolemies were tolerant and granted the Jews considerable autonomy, allowing them to develop their unique culture undisturbed as long as they paid their taxes and remained submissive. Many Jews settled in Alexandria and gradually forgot their Hebrew in the Hellenistic environment. As a result, a translation of the OT into Greek (the Septuagint) was produced there. While the Ptolemies did not force Hellenism on the Jews of either Alexandria or Palestine, many were influenced by Hellenistic ideas.<\/p>\n<p>When Ptolemy V came to the throne as a minor in 203 <span>BC<\/span>, Antiochus III of Syria took advantage of the weakened Egypt and conquered Palestine (198 <span>BC<\/span>). Apparently the Jews hoped to gain something from the change and welcomed the Syrians. But their hope was ill-founded. Antiochus III suffered disastrous defeat at the hands of Rome at Magnesia in 190 <span>BC<\/span>. Syria not only lost much territory but also was forced to pay a huge indemnity. Thereafter, the Jews suffered under great financial burdens, along with other peoples of the empire. The next Syrian king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 <span>BC<\/span>), decided to launch an effort to achieve greater internal strength and unity within the empire by forcing, among other things, a greater acceptance of Greek culture and the cult of the divine ruler. Naturally this idolatrous requirement weighed heavily on the monotheistic Jews and incited revolution.<\/p>\n<p>But this does not completely explain the Maccabean revolt against Syria. In 168 <span>BC<\/span> armed conflict broke out between Jewish factions in Jerusalem. Antiochus IV chose to interpret this as open rebellion and sent an army against the city. His forces demolished part of the city wall and many houses. After this Antiochus decided to suppress Judaism completely, and he dedicated the temple to Zeus and sacrificed swine on the altar. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other religious festivals were no longer permitted, and public worship of heathen gods became compulsory.<\/p>\n<p>Some Jews capitulated to Antiochus’s orders or only resisted passively, but a few decided to resist openly. Chief among them were Mattathias and his five sons. After the early death of Mattathias, his son Judas Maccabeus led his forces to victory over the Syrians, regaining the right to restore Jewish worship. The rededication of the temple on December 25, 164 <span>BC<\/span>, inaugurated the Festival of Hanukkah (1 Macc 4:36-59). Subsequently, Jonathan and Simon (other sons of Mattathias) continued the struggle until independence was gained in 142 <span>BC<\/span>; this was possible in large part because they saw how to take advantage of the increasing weakness of Syrian rulers and the competition for the royal office.<\/p>\n<p>Simon ruled the Jewish state until his assassination in 134 <span>BC<\/span>, when his son John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>) took over. John Hyrcanus fought successfully in the east, north, and south, gaining land in Transjordan, capturing Shechem and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim, and subjugating the Idumeans in the south, forcing them to adopt Judaism. His son Aristobulus ruled for only about a year (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), but he added a portion of Galilee to the kingdom. When he died, his widow married his brother Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>). Janneus carried on almost incessant military action during his reign, and by the time of his death had almost recovered the kingdom of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>When Janneus died, Alexandra, widow of two kings, took the throne (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>) and her eldest son, Hyrcanus II, became high priest. Her reign was peaceful and prosperous, but when she died, her sons fell to squabbling. Their appeals to Pompey, who was campaigning in the eastern Mediterranean area, were responsible for Roman interference in the region and conquest of Palestine in 63 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRomanPeriod\">The Roman Period<\/p>\n<p>After the Romans took over Palestine, Hyrcanus II was confirmed as high priest and was also appointed as ethnarch or political ruler (63–40 <span>BC<\/span>). But Antipater, father of Herod the Great, was the real power behind the throne, and during many of those years Hyrcanus was virtually unable to function because of the confusion of the Roman civil wars. Antipater was loyal to Rome and saw that Roman policies were carried out; he won Julius Caesar’s favor toward Jews of both Palestine and in the Dispersion.<\/p>\n<p>With the support of Mark Antony, Herod managed to get himself appointed king of Judea by the Roman senate in 40 <span>BC<\/span>. But a Parthian invasion of Syria and Jewish hatred for the Romans made it possible for Antigonus II, last king of the Maccabean family, to rule for three years (40–37 <span>BC<\/span>). Finally, Herod ascended his throne in 37 and ruled until 4 <span>BC<\/span>. As an allied king, Herod proved to be an excellent ruler from the Roman point of view and earned the title of “Great.” He brought some order to regions east of the Jordan and made possible organization of the Roman province of Arabia. He also furthered the cultural plans of Augustus for development of a Greco-Roman civilization throughout the whole empire.<\/p>\n<p>Herod admired Greek culture and contributed to building projects in Rhodes, Antioch, Damascus, Athens, and elsewhere outside Palestine. Within Palestine he rebuilt Samaria and named it Sebaste in honor of Augustus (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Sebastos<\/span> is Greek for “Augustus”) and also constructed the great port of Caesarea. Probably about as large as Manhattan Island, it became the capital of Roman Palestine. Among his many other building projects, remodeling the temple in Jerusalem was the most famous. Begun in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, it was not completed until just a few years before its destruction in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The material splendor of Herod’s reign did not win the affection or support of the Jews, however. Nor did he achieve peace and harmony in his family, among whom there were periodic eruptions of treason, unfaithfulness, and murder. He worried about any threat to his rule and cracked down hard to destroy such threats, as is evident from his slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem after the birth of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, Herod controlled Idumea, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and the area northeast of the Sea of Galilee. By his last will, his son Archelaus was to rule Idumea, Judea, and Samaria; Antipas, Galilee and Perea; and Philip, the region northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was deposed in <span>AD<\/span> 6, and his territory became a Roman province (<span>AD<\/span> 6–41) to be ruled by direct appointees of Rome. The best-known of these was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36), who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. Antipas was more successful and built a new capital at Tiberias, but he ran afoul of the emperor’s good pleasure in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and was deposed. Philip was the most effective of the three and ruled until his death in <span>AD<\/span> 34. Philip’s lands were later given to Herod Agrippa I in <span>AD<\/span> 37; the holdings of Antipas were then added in <span>AD<\/span> 39; and in 41 Agrippa also received Samaria, Judea, and Idumea.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44) was the heir of the Maccabees (through his grandmother Mariamne, first wife of Herod the Great), and for this reason had the support of patriotic Jews and of the Pharisees for his observance of divine ordinances. But when he built a new north wall for Jerusalem and dabbled in foreign affairs, he aroused the suspicions of the Romans; when he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44, they turned the kingdom into a Roman province.<\/p>\n<p>As is clear from the Gospels, several sects had arisen in Palestine by Roman times and were active during the first century. The Zealots opposed Roman rule and advocated armed rebellion. Herodians supported the Herodian family and Roman power. The Pharisees were fanatically devoted to the law and were supernaturalists in theological orientation. They were somewhat content to support Rome if given religious freedom, and they dominated the synagogues of the land. The Sadducees were antisupernaturalists, tended to collaborate with the ruling regime, and were dominant in the temple. Generally speaking, the literature of the intertestamental period and the popular mentality of the time tended to view the Messiah as a political deliverer who would free his people from foreign domination and set up a new independent kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Roman prefects ruled Palestine from <span>AD<\/span> 44–66. They had a knack for offending the religious scruples of the Jews and alienating them in other ways. With Felix (<span>AD<\/span> 52–60) there began a constant tension between Jews and Romans that led to the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). While Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea (Acts 23:23–24:27) about <span>AD<\/span> 58–60, riots broke out there between Jews and Gentiles. Festus (<span>AD<\/span> 60–62; Acts 25) was an able administrator, but the situation was almost out of hand. After he died in office, there was virtual anarchy until his successor, Albinus, arrived (<span>AD<\/span> 62–64). Totally incompetent and dishonest, Albinus was recalled in 64 and replaced by Florus (<span>AD<\/span> 64–66). Florus was even worse, resorting to open robbery and bribery until there was no safety or justice in the land. Finally, the Jews could take no more.<\/p>\n<p>The spark that ignited the fires of rebellion was an anti-Semitic act by the Hellenistic population of Caesarea in <span>AD<\/span> 66. Soon riots spread to numerous cities, and Roman garrisons were massacred in several places. But the Jews were not united, and in Jerusalem armed bands of Jews fought with each other for mastery. Vespasian was chosen to command the Roman army of some 60,000 to deal with the insurrection. He had subjugated most of Palestine by the time he was elevated to the imperial chair in <span>AD<\/span> 69 (after the death of Nero), and he left his son Titus in charge of completing the operations. In August of <span>AD<\/span> 70 the walls of Jerusalem were breached, many of the people butchered, and the city and the temple leveled. Masada held out until <span>AD<\/span> 73. Palestine had been flattened by Roman might. Loss of life and property had been incalculable and indescribable.<\/p>\n<p>On two more occasions the Jews were destined to fight disastrously against the Romans. Under Trajan’s rule a rebellion of Jews broke out in Cyrenaica in <span>AD<\/span> 115 and spread rapidly to Cyprus, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. In the beginning it was an outgrowth of agitation between the Jews and their Hellenistic neighbors, but it developed into a challenge to Roman authority. This was particularly true after the successes of Parthia on Rome’s eastern frontier when there seemed to be some hope of success in throwing off the Roman yoke. Wherever Jews got the upper hand, they perpetrated massacres, and the non-Semitic population retaliated in kind. Trajan ruthlessly suppressed the rebels and restored order everywhere except Egypt; his successor, Hadrian, was left to accomplish that.<\/p>\n<p>But Hadrian faced a new rebellion of his own, brought on by his law forbidding circumcision (which he considered to be inhumane) and his decision in <span>AD<\/span> 130 to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina and erect a temple to Jupiter on the site of the temple of Yahweh. The latter would not only profane the temple site but also would preclude any rebuilding of the Jewish temple.<\/p>\n<p>Leader of this second Jewish revolt was Simeon, prince of Israel, called Bar-Kochba (“Son of the Star”). Both sides fought with such great ferocity for over three years (<span>AD<\/span> 132–135) that the population of Judea was almost exterminated. Jerusalem was rebuilt as a Roman colony, and Jews were forbidden to enter on pain of death. Even as late as the fourth century they were permitted to enter only once a year, on the anniversary of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. After the Bar-Kochba revolt, Judaism retreated increasingly within the citadel of the written and oral law, thus separating itself from the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Conquest and Allotment of the Land; David; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; First Jewish Revolt; Jew; Judaism; Moses; Patriarchs, Period of the; Saul #2; Solomon; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ISRAEL, History of An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world. Preview • Patriarchal Age • Sojour...","summary_en":"ISRAEL, History of An account of God’s sovereign purpose in calling a people out of paganism and establishing them as witnesses for the true faith among the nations, of God’s sovereign power in protecting them from extinction, of his sovereign justice in dealing with their departure from his ways of holiness, of God’s sovereign grace in forgiving their sins and restoring them to fellowship with himself by providing through them a Savior for the entire world. Preview • Patriarchal Age • Sojour...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20778,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45455,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:7","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> had sworn to rescue <em>Gibeon,<\/em> so now he <em>set out<\/em> to do it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> had sworn to rescue <em>Gibeon,<\/em> so now he <em>set out<\/em> to do it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:7 Joshua had sworn to rescue Gibeon, so now he set out to do it.","summary_en":"10:7 Joshua had sworn to rescue Gibeon, so now he set out to do it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73081,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:7","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> had sworn to rescue <em>Gibeon,<\/em> so now he <em>set out<\/em> to do it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> had sworn to rescue <em>Gibeon,<\/em> so now he <em>set out<\/em> to do it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:7 Joshua had sworn to rescue Gibeon, so now he set out to do it.","summary_en":"10:7 Joshua had sworn to rescue Gibeon, so now he set out to do it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100707,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:7","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> had sworn to rescue <em>Gibeon,<\/em> so now he <em>set out<\/em> to do it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> had sworn to rescue <em>Gibeon,<\/em> so now he <em>set out<\/em> to do it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:7 Joshua had sworn to rescue Gibeon, so now he set out to do it.","summary_en":"10:7 Joshua had sworn to rescue Gibeon, so now he set out to do it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128333,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:7","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> had sworn to rescue <em>Gibeon,<\/em> so now he <em>set out<\/em> to do it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:7<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> had sworn to rescue <em>Gibeon,<\/em> so now he <em>set out<\/em> to do it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:7 Joshua had sworn to rescue Gibeon, so now he set out to do it.","summary_en":"10:7 Joshua had sworn to rescue Gibeon, so now he set out to do it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62025,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God as Holy Warrior","title_en":"God as Holy Warrior","content_ro":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","summary_en":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89651,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God as Holy Warrior","title_en":"God as Holy Warrior","content_ro":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","summary_en":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117277,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God as Holy Warrior","title_en":"God as Holy Warrior","content_ro":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","summary_en":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144903,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God as Holy Warrior","title_en":"God as Holy Warrior","content_ro":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","summary_en":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":45456,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:8","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:8<\/strong> God once again urged Joshua <em>not<\/em> to <em>be afraid,<\/em> assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:8<\/strong> God once again urged Joshua <em>not<\/em> to <em>be afraid,<\/em> assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:8 God once again urged Joshua not to be afraid, assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).","summary_en":"10:8 God once again urged Joshua not to be afraid, assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73082,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:8","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:8<\/strong> God once again urged Joshua <em>not<\/em> to <em>be afraid,<\/em> assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:8<\/strong> God once again urged Joshua <em>not<\/em> to <em>be afraid,<\/em> assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:8 God once again urged Joshua not to be afraid, assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).","summary_en":"10:8 God once again urged Joshua not to be afraid, assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100708,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:8","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:8<\/strong> God once again urged Joshua <em>not<\/em> to <em>be afraid,<\/em> assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:8<\/strong> God once again urged Joshua <em>not<\/em> to <em>be afraid,<\/em> assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:8 God once again urged Joshua not to be afraid, assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).","summary_en":"10:8 God once again urged Joshua not to be afraid, assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128334,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:8","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:8<\/strong> God once again urged Joshua <em>not<\/em> to <em>be afraid,<\/em> assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:8<\/strong> God once again urged Joshua <em>not<\/em> to <em>be afraid,<\/em> assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:8 God once again urged Joshua not to be afraid, assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).","summary_en":"10:8 God once again urged Joshua not to be afraid, assuring him of victory over Israel’s enemies (see also 1:9; 8:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":7461,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Conquest and Allotment of the Land","title_en":"Conquest and Allotment of the Land","content_ro":"<h3>CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND<\/h3>\n<p>Terms referring to Israel’s winning of the Promised Land and the distinctive way in which it was divided among the Israelite tribes.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conquest\">Conquest<\/p>\n<p>The conquest of Canaan by the Israelites is one of the most remarkable events of OT history: a loosely organized nomadic people successfully invaded a long-established culture secure in its protected urban centers. That achievement, according to the Scriptures, was the result of a promise God had made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that their descendants would possess the land (Gn 17:8; 26:4; 28:13; Ex 3:15-17). Dispossession of the pagan inhabitants was a divine judgment on false religion and its associated immorality (Dt 7:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who attempt to reconstruct the history of the Conquest face certain problems. Critical scholarship has run into conflict with statements in the Bible at three key points: chronology, rate of occupation, and the issue of Israel’s military annihilation of portions of the population of the Canaanite city-states.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Reference works and scholarly treatments of OT history often suggest a date for the exodus from Egypt in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> (1280 <span>BC<\/span> or later). Several biblical references to that event would seem to call for an earlier date. According to 1 Kings 6:1, construction of Solomon’s temple was begun in the fourth year of his reign, 480 years after the exodus. Since Solomon’s fourth year was about 960 <span>BC<\/span>, that would place the exodus at 1440 <span>BC<\/span>. In Judges 11:26-28, when Jephthah, eighth of the named judges, argued with the king of Ammon about Israelite possession of land east of the Jordan River, he indicated that Israel had occupied this territory 300 years. Saul’s accession to kingship about 1020 <span>BC<\/span> was still some decades off, so the later date proposed for the exodus does not allow sufficient time for the period of the judges. Further, the apostle Paul referred to a period of about 450 years from the exodus to Samuel’s day (Acts 13:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JoshuasCampaigns\">Joshua’s Campaigns<\/p>\n<p>A picture of a concentrated period for the Israelite conquest of Canaan is given in the book of Joshua. Yet many scholars insist that an earlier gradual penetration occurred (by Hebrews who supposedly did not accompany Jacob into Egypt), plus an extended mopping-up procedure that continued down to the time of the monarchy. Although the biblical record allows for later acquisitions in some areas (e.g., Megiddo and Beth-shan), there is no valid reason for rejecting the description of the major Conquest given in Joshua 1–12.<\/p>\n<p>The Conquest began on the east side of the Jordan River under Moses. After Moses’ death, Joshua led Israel across the river, capturing first the fortified cities of Jericho and Ai. Those strategic victories provided access to the hill country and drove a wedge into the middle of Canaan. Two major campaigns followed—a southern and then a northern—which won for Israel in six years’ time the key cities of Canaan, defeating 31 kings and concluding the initial and principal stage of the Conquest.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 32 records the earlier assignment of territory east of the Jordan (Gilead and Bashan, acquired by the defeat of two kings, Sihon of the Amorites and Og of Bashan) to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. Though their land had already been acquired, the men of those tribes were obligated to cross the Jordan with the rest to participate in the military conquest of Canaan itself.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua 2–8 records the unusual events of the destruction of Jericho and Ai in the initial thrust westward. Those victories tended to demoralize the remaining cities of the land. Chapters 9 and 10 describe the southern campaign, including the Gibeonites’ procurement of a treaty by deception. Joshua 10, with its account of the remarkable rout of the enemy forces (vv 9-12) and miraculous prolonging of daylight, is the central passage about the southern campaign. In the subsequent battle, an alliance of five Amorite kings was crushed, the kings were killed, and the city-states of the area were destroyed, except for Jerusalem (later captured by David).<\/p>\n<p>In his northern campaign, Joshua confronted a more formidable alliance. Yet even Jabin, the powerful king of Hazor, largest of the Canaanite cities, supported by his local vassals, was no match for Israel’s armies. Joshua 11 describes that phase, then sums up the entire Conquest in verses 16-23 and on through chapter 12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND<\/h3>\n<p>Terms referring to Israel’s winning of the Promised Land and the distinctive way in which it was divided among the Israelite tribes.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conquest\">Conquest<\/p>\n<p>The conquest of Canaan by the Israelites is one of the most remarkable events of OT history: a loosely organized nomadic people successfully invaded a long-established culture secure in its protected urban centers. That achievement, according to the Scriptures, was the result of a promise God had made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that their descendants would possess the land (Gn 17:8; 26:4; 28:13; Ex 3:15-17). Dispossession of the pagan inhabitants was a divine judgment on false religion and its associated immorality (Dt 7:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who attempt to reconstruct the history of the Conquest face certain problems. Critical scholarship has run into conflict with statements in the Bible at three key points: chronology, rate of occupation, and the issue of Israel’s military annihilation of portions of the population of the Canaanite city-states.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Reference works and scholarly treatments of OT history often suggest a date for the exodus from Egypt in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> (1280 <span>BC<\/span> or later). Several biblical references to that event would seem to call for an earlier date. According to 1 Kings 6:1, construction of Solomon’s temple was begun in the fourth year of his reign, 480 years after the exodus. Since Solomon’s fourth year was about 960 <span>BC<\/span>, that would place the exodus at 1440 <span>BC<\/span>. In Judges 11:26-28, when Jephthah, eighth of the named judges, argued with the king of Ammon about Israelite possession of land east of the Jordan River, he indicated that Israel had occupied this territory 300 years. Saul’s accession to kingship about 1020 <span>BC<\/span> was still some decades off, so the later date proposed for the exodus does not allow sufficient time for the period of the judges. Further, the apostle Paul referred to a period of about 450 years from the exodus to Samuel’s day (Acts 13:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JoshuasCampaigns\">Joshua’s Campaigns<\/p>\n<p>A picture of a concentrated period for the Israelite conquest of Canaan is given in the book of Joshua. Yet many scholars insist that an earlier gradual penetration occurred (by Hebrews who supposedly did not accompany Jacob into Egypt), plus an extended mopping-up procedure that continued down to the time of the monarchy. Although the biblical record allows for later acquisitions in some areas (e.g., Megiddo and Beth-shan), there is no valid reason for rejecting the description of the major Conquest given in Joshua 1–12.<\/p>\n<p>The Conquest began on the east side of the Jordan River under Moses. After Moses’ death, Joshua led Israel across the river, capturing first the fortified cities of Jericho and Ai. Those strategic victories provided access to the hill country and drove a wedge into the middle of Canaan. Two major campaigns followed—a southern and then a northern—which won for Israel in six years’ time the key cities of Canaan, defeating 31 kings and concluding the initial and principal stage of the Conquest.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 32 records the earlier assignment of territory east of the Jordan (Gilead and Bashan, acquired by the defeat of two kings, Sihon of the Amorites and Og of Bashan) to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. Though their land had already been acquired, the men of those tribes were obligated to cross the Jordan with the rest to participate in the military conquest of Canaan itself.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua 2–8 records the unusual events of the destruction of Jericho and Ai in the initial thrust westward. Those victories tended to demoralize the remaining cities of the land. Chapters 9 and 10 describe the southern campaign, including the Gibeonites’ procurement of a treaty by deception. Joshua 10, with its account of the remarkable rout of the enemy forces (vv 9-12) and miraculous prolonging of daylight, is the central passage about the southern campaign. In the subsequent battle, an alliance of five Amorite kings was crushed, the kings were killed, and the city-states of the area were destroyed, except for Jerusalem (later captured by David).<\/p>\n<p>In his northern campaign, Joshua confronted a more formidable alliance. Yet even Jabin, the powerful king of Hazor, largest of the Canaanite cities, supported by his local vassals, was no match for Israel’s armies. Joshua 11 describes that phase, then sums up the entire Conquest in verses 16-23 and on through chapter 12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND Terms referring to Israel’s winning of the Promised Land and the distinctive way in which it was divided among the Israelite tribes. Conquest The conquest of Canaan by the Israelites is one of the most remarkable events of OT history: a loosely organized nomadic people successfully invaded a long-established culture secure in its protected urban centers. That achievement, according to the Scriptures, was the result of a promise God had made to Abraham, Isaac...","summary_en":"CONQUEST AND ALLOTMENT OF THE LAND Terms referring to Israel’s winning of the Promised Land and the distinctive way in which it was divided among the Israelite tribes. Conquest The conquest of Canaan by the Israelites is one of the most remarkable events of OT history: a loosely organized nomadic people successfully invaded a long-established culture secure in its protected urban centers. That achievement, according to the Scriptures, was the result of a promise God had made to Abraham, Isaac...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13779,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gibeonites Gibeon","title_en":"Gibeonites Gibeon","content_ro":"<h3>GIBEON, GIBEONITES<\/h3>\n<p>Place and its inhabitants figuring prominently in the OT from the days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, though both were in existence outside these time limits. The site may be identified with confidence as el-Jib some five and a half miles (8.9 kilometers) north of Jerusalem. This identification was proposed as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since the excavation of this site in the years 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of 31 jar handles bearing the name of Gibeon, the identification is placed beyond doubt. Certain geographical and chronological considerations also support this. The location of Gibeon, north of Jerusalem and accessible to that city in the days of David, Solomon, and Jeremiah, as well as its location southwest of Ai combine geographically to support this identification. Further, the periods of occupation at el-Jib revealed by excavation are parallel to historical data supplied by the OT.<\/p>\n<p>The first mention of Gibeon and its inhabitants comes in Joshua 9 and 10 in the days of Joshua, perhaps about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>. Hearing of the success of the people of Israel at Jericho and Ai, the people of Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim plotted to obtain a covenant of peace from them. By pretending that they had come from afar and displaying worn-out clothing and footwear as well as dried bread, they were able to deceive Joshua into making a treaty with them. When their deception was discovered, they were sentenced to chop wood and carry water for the Israelites (Jos 9:21-27). Neighboring groups of people from Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, led by Adoni-zedek king of Jerusalem, launched an attack on Gibeon because of its defection to Joshua. The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua, and the Israelites made a forced march from Gilgal to assist them. The enemies of Gibeon were driven down the road to Beth-horon. Their rout was completed with the assistance of hailstones. In that day the sun stood still over Gibeon (10:9-13). Only Gibeon made peace with the incoming Israelites (11:19). In due course the town became part of Benjamin’s territory (18:25; 21:17).<\/p>\n\n<p>In the days before David was king, Saul’s general encountered some of David’s men at Gibeon and engaged in an unusual contest at the pool of Gibeon. Twelve men from each side fought and were all thrust through by the swords of their opponents (2 Sm 2:12-17). This encounter was followed by a further skirmish in which David’s men were successful (vv 18-32). Later, David’s nephew Amasa, captain of the rebel army of Absalom, was attacked by Joab at the “great stone which is in Gibeon” (20:8) and left to die in the highway in his blood. In David’s time also, seven sons of Saul were executed “at Gibeon on the mountain of the Lord” (21:1-9) in retribution for Saul’s violation of the ancient covenant between Gibeon and Israel when he slew men of Gibeon (vv 1-6).<\/p>\n<p>There was an important high place still operating at Gibeon in David’s time. The tabernacle of the Lord rested there, and an altar of burnt offering as well (1 Chr 16:39; 21:29). It was at Gibeon, according to 1 Kings 3:3-9, that Solomon had a dream in which Solomon asked for wisdom to govern Israel well (cf. 2 Chr 1:2-13). A second time God appeared to Solomon at Gibeon to assure him that his prayer had been heard and to urge him to walk in God’s ways (1 Kgs 9:2-9). Gibeon was among the cities taken by Pharaoh Shishak in the second half of the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>. Presumably Gibeon remained an important center during the days of the kings. There was a prophet in Gibeon in the days of Jeremiah, although he prophesied falsely (Jer 28:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the Gibeonites went into exile in Babylon and a small group returned (Neh 7:25) and assisted Nehemiah in repairing the Jerusalem wall (3:7-8). Later still, Josephus relates that Cestius pitched his camp at Gibeon on his march to Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 66 (<em>War<\/em> 2.515-516). Biblical references cover a period from about 1200 <span>BC<\/span> to about 445 <span>BC<\/span>, in archaeological terms from the beginning of the Iron I period, through the Iron II period, and into the Persian or Iron III period. We would expect, therefore, to find evidence for at least these periods in an excavation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Gibbar.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GIBEON, GIBEONITES<\/h3>\n<p>Place and its inhabitants figuring prominently in the OT from the days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, though both were in existence outside these time limits. The site may be identified with confidence as el-Jib some five and a half miles (8.9 kilometers) north of Jerusalem. This identification was proposed as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since the excavation of this site in the years 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of 31 jar handles bearing the name of Gibeon, the identification is placed beyond doubt. Certain geographical and chronological considerations also support this. The location of Gibeon, north of Jerusalem and accessible to that city in the days of David, Solomon, and Jeremiah, as well as its location southwest of Ai combine geographically to support this identification. Further, the periods of occupation at el-Jib revealed by excavation are parallel to historical data supplied by the OT.<\/p>\n<p>The first mention of Gibeon and its inhabitants comes in Joshua 9 and 10 in the days of Joshua, perhaps about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>. Hearing of the success of the people of Israel at Jericho and Ai, the people of Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim plotted to obtain a covenant of peace from them. By pretending that they had come from afar and displaying worn-out clothing and footwear as well as dried bread, they were able to deceive Joshua into making a treaty with them. When their deception was discovered, they were sentenced to chop wood and carry water for the Israelites (Jos 9:21-27). Neighboring groups of people from Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, led by Adoni-zedek king of Jerusalem, launched an attack on Gibeon because of its defection to Joshua. The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua, and the Israelites made a forced march from Gilgal to assist them. The enemies of Gibeon were driven down the road to Beth-horon. Their rout was completed with the assistance of hailstones. In that day the sun stood still over Gibeon (10:9-13). Only Gibeon made peace with the incoming Israelites (11:19). In due course the town became part of Benjamin’s territory (18:25; 21:17).<\/p>\n\n<p>In the days before David was king, Saul’s general encountered some of David’s men at Gibeon and engaged in an unusual contest at the pool of Gibeon. Twelve men from each side fought and were all thrust through by the swords of their opponents (2 Sm 2:12-17). This encounter was followed by a further skirmish in which David’s men were successful (vv 18-32). Later, David’s nephew Amasa, captain of the rebel army of Absalom, was attacked by Joab at the “great stone which is in Gibeon” (20:8) and left to die in the highway in his blood. In David’s time also, seven sons of Saul were executed “at Gibeon on the mountain of the Lord” (21:1-9) in retribution for Saul’s violation of the ancient covenant between Gibeon and Israel when he slew men of Gibeon (vv 1-6).<\/p>\n<p>There was an important high place still operating at Gibeon in David’s time. The tabernacle of the Lord rested there, and an altar of burnt offering as well (1 Chr 16:39; 21:29). It was at Gibeon, according to 1 Kings 3:3-9, that Solomon had a dream in which Solomon asked for wisdom to govern Israel well (cf. 2 Chr 1:2-13). A second time God appeared to Solomon at Gibeon to assure him that his prayer had been heard and to urge him to walk in God’s ways (1 Kgs 9:2-9). Gibeon was among the cities taken by Pharaoh Shishak in the second half of the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>. Presumably Gibeon remained an important center during the days of the kings. There was a prophet in Gibeon in the days of Jeremiah, although he prophesied falsely (Jer 28:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Some of the Gibeonites went into exile in Babylon and a small group returned (Neh 7:25) and assisted Nehemiah in repairing the Jerusalem wall (3:7-8). Later still, Josephus relates that Cestius pitched his camp at Gibeon on his march to Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 66 (<em>War<\/em> 2.515-516). Biblical references cover a period from about 1200 <span>BC<\/span> to about 445 <span>BC<\/span>, in archaeological terms from the beginning of the Iron I period, through the Iron II period, and into the Persian or Iron III period. We would expect, therefore, to find evidence for at least these periods in an excavation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Gibbar.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GIBEON, GIBEONITES Place and its inhabitants figuring prominently in the OT from the days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, though both were in existence outside these time limits. The site may be identified with confidence as el-Jib some five and a half miles (8.9 kilometers) north of Jerusalem. This identification was proposed as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since the excavation of this site in the years 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of 31 jar handles bearing the...","summary_en":"GIBEON, GIBEONITES Place and its inhabitants figuring prominently in the OT from the days of Joshua to the days of Nehemiah, though both were in existence outside these time limits. The site may be identified with confidence as el-Jib some five and a half miles (8.9 kilometers) north of Jerusalem. This identification was proposed as early as 1838 by Edward Robinson. Since the excavation of this site in the years 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, and 1962, and the discovery of 31 jar handles bearing the...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21019,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tribe of Judah","title_en":"Tribe of Judah","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAH, Tribe of<\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeographicalTerritory\">Geographical Territory<\/p>\n<p>The frontiers of Judah are well defined in Joshua 15, which describes the inheritance of the tribe after the Conquest. Second Kings 23:8 describes Judah as extending from Geba to Beersheba: Geba is about 8 miles (13 kilometers) north of Jerusalem, and Beersheba about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south. Judah thus held a strip of mountain land on the central spine of southern Palestine, about 50 miles (80 kilometers) from north to south and 20 miles (32 kilometers) from east to west. Of this 1,000 square miles, half was desert (on the south and east); the rest was stony and not well watered. The central ridge, upon which are situated Jerusalem, Hebron, and Beersheba, rises to over 3,000 feet (914 meters) in places before tapering off into the desert in the south. Along this ridge, connecting these towns, runs the chief road. To the east, the ridge drops steeply to the Dead Sea, nearly 5,000 feet (1,524 meters) below. To the west it drops less sharply to the “lowlands,” actually a plateau some 1,000 feet (305 meters) high, before descending to the Philistine plain, which stretches to the sea.<\/p>\n<p>Judah proper (Jerusalem was a later addition) was remote and secure in its hills. Its true center and capital was Hebron, 3,500 feet (1,067 meters) up. Only on the north was it vulnerable to attackers marching south along the ridge road. However, three great valleys led up from the western lowlands into the hills: the valley of Ajalon, the valley of Sorek, and the valley of Elah. Battles would rage up and down these valleys from the days of Joshua to the time of David and long afterward. The few roads to the east (the one from Jerusalem to Jericho is the best known) were not so important, although it was by this “back door” that Joshua had invaded the hill country (Jos 10:9). Judah was thus geographically well out of the mainstream of Israelite life, since only the territory of Simeon lay to the south.<\/p>\n<p>The area occupied by Judah falls easily into three natural regions: the central mountain ridge, fairly densely settled, especially on its western side, where rainfall and dew were greatest; the eastern slopes, almost uninhabited and mostly desert; and the southern pastoral region round Beersheba, where the mountains fall away into dry prairie, with sparse settlement throughout.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EconomicLife\">Economic Life<\/p>\n<p>To Israel, Palestine was a land flowing with milk and honey (Nm 13:27). Half of Judah might be desert, but the rest had reasonably good soil, and on the western slopes the rain was usually adequate. Wheat, barley, olives, figs, and especially vineyards, grew freely. The land might be stony, but stones could be collected and used for walls and buildings. Not as rich as the great northern valleys like Jezreel, Judah was still good mixed farming country, although it required hard work. Sheep and goats were plentiful, and that meant wool and milk. Cattle were probably rarer; Judah was not cattle country like Bashan (Nm 32:1). Wool meant cloth, and hide meant leather. In those days the hills were forested, which meant fuel and building materials. Clay for pottery was readily available for domestic utensils. Copper came from Edom in the south, and iron from Philistia in the west; these could be obtained by bartering agricultural produce. Whether they realized it or not, God had dealt graciously with the people of Judah in giving them adequate resources. Nonetheless, the climate was bracing: a cold, wet winter, with snow and hail at times, and a long, rainless summer, with low humidity and cool nights. This brought heavy dews on the eastern slopes (Jgs 6:38), and precious rainwater was conserved in rock-hewn cisterns (Jer 2:13). Permanent streams of any size did not exist in Judah, but springs or “wells” were abundant, from Jerusalem to Beersheba. It was not until Judah got caught up into the economic life of Solomon’s trading empire that its simple pattern of life changed; even then, the change in the hills of Judah was far less than elsewhere. Judah had no seaport of its own and controlled no rich caravan routes. It had no coveted raw materials, like the copper of Edom or the cedars of Lebanon; no luxury goods for trade, like the purple dye of Phoenicia or the gold of Ophir; no lush land to tempt the greed of others. In God’s mercy Judah’s temptations were few. Its faith was also less liable to be corrupted: comparatively few Canaanites had ever settled in this area, while the Conquest had been more thorough in the south than in the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoryandSignificance\">History and Significance<\/p>\n<p>The earliest blessings on Judah are recorded in Genesis 49:8-12 and Deuteronomy 33:7. After the exodus, the tribe of Judah took first place in the desert camping arrangement (Nm 2:3). Caleb, one of the two faithful spies, was a tribal chieftain of Judah (13:6). In Joshua’s invasion of Palestine, the highlands allotted to Judah were the first to be cleared of Canaanites, after the initial fighting around Jericho and Ai (Jos 6; 8). The book of Joshua is a summary account of the whole campaign.<\/p>\n\n<p>After Joshua’s death, Simeon and Judah continued the fight against the Canaanites and marched together against the hill country of the south, led by Caleb and Othniel. Although God’s gift to Judah had been the whole land westward as far as the sea, Judah failed to take anything but the hills. The plain was controlled by iron-protected chariots and fortress cities. The king of Jerusalem was killed and Jerusalem was burned (Jgs 1:8), but the Jebusites continued to occupy the area until David’s day (v 21). The men of Judah, like other Israelites, might burn Canaanite towns, but they did not usually occupy the old sites themselves. Under the judges, the tribe of Judah was still isolated, though Othniel was of Judah (ch 3). In the great battle against Sisera, Judah is not even mentioned (ch 5). This tribal isolation was soon lost, first through Philistine invasions from the west, and then through David’s capture of Jerusalem and the placing of the national and religious capital there. Although in Judges 15:11 the men of Judah are prepared even to hand over Samson to the Philistines, with Samuel as judge, everything changes. The ark returns (1 Sm 7:1); lost territory is regained (v 14). Indeed, Samuel’s sons act as judges in Beersheba (8:2), although they are corrupt.<\/p>\n<p>David finally breaks the power of the Philistines in a series of victories and rules as king first in Hebron, Judah’s chief town (2 Sm 2:1-4). When he is crowned king of all Israel, however, he moves the capital to the newly conquered Jerusalem, on the northern frontier of the tribe of Judah (5:6-10). Here the ark was to be brought (ch 6), and here Solomon was to build the temple (7:13). All God’s promises will henceforth cluster around Jerusalem, the temple, and David’s line. Most important, the Messiah would come from Judah (Gn 49:10).<\/p>\n<p>The division between the northern and southern tribes had begun in David’s lifetime, after Absalom’s revolt (2 Sm 20:1); after Solomon’s death, the rift became complete (1 Kgs 12:16). Henceforth for 200 years, until the fall of the northern kingdom in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, there were two little kingdoms side by side: a larger one in the north and east, called Israel (the “ten tribes” of 1 Kgs 11:35), and a smaller one in the south, called Judah. With this, the history of Judah as a tribe virtually comes to an end, for although still called by the old tribal name, this little kingdom was really a “Greater Judah.” It now contained not only the old tribe of Judah but also the newly conquered Jebusite territory of Jerusalem, some of the old Philistine country, and the tribes of Benjamin and Simeon, as well as many Levites (2 Chr 11:14) and other “loyalists” from the north. Indeed, from now on, “tribe” had far less meaning than before; it was more important where a person lived than of what tribe the person was, although, within the family, tribal origins continued to be remembered. For 250 more years the little kingdom of Judah persisted alone. Even after the exile it was the tiny province of Judah that emerged under Nehemiah (Neh 1:2-3), and Judea still remained as a district in NT days (Lk 3:1). In fact, the vast majority of later Jews were of the tribe of Judah, as the very name “Jew” shows. But the chief glory of the tribe of Judah, now as ever, was that the house of David sprang from it. When Jesus Christ was born, he was to be of David’s line and Judah’s tribe. So it is that in Revelation 7:5, when 12,000 are sealed from each tribe, Judah has pride of place in the list, as it had in Numbers (Nm 2:3) so long before.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judah (Person) #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAH, Tribe of<\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeographicalTerritory\">Geographical Territory<\/p>\n<p>The frontiers of Judah are well defined in Joshua 15, which describes the inheritance of the tribe after the Conquest. Second Kings 23:8 describes Judah as extending from Geba to Beersheba: Geba is about 8 miles (13 kilometers) north of Jerusalem, and Beersheba about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south. Judah thus held a strip of mountain land on the central spine of southern Palestine, about 50 miles (80 kilometers) from north to south and 20 miles (32 kilometers) from east to west. Of this 1,000 square miles, half was desert (on the south and east); the rest was stony and not well watered. The central ridge, upon which are situated Jerusalem, Hebron, and Beersheba, rises to over 3,000 feet (914 meters) in places before tapering off into the desert in the south. Along this ridge, connecting these towns, runs the chief road. To the east, the ridge drops steeply to the Dead Sea, nearly 5,000 feet (1,524 meters) below. To the west it drops less sharply to the “lowlands,” actually a plateau some 1,000 feet (305 meters) high, before descending to the Philistine plain, which stretches to the sea.<\/p>\n<p>Judah proper (Jerusalem was a later addition) was remote and secure in its hills. Its true center and capital was Hebron, 3,500 feet (1,067 meters) up. Only on the north was it vulnerable to attackers marching south along the ridge road. However, three great valleys led up from the western lowlands into the hills: the valley of Ajalon, the valley of Sorek, and the valley of Elah. Battles would rage up and down these valleys from the days of Joshua to the time of David and long afterward. The few roads to the east (the one from Jerusalem to Jericho is the best known) were not so important, although it was by this “back door” that Joshua had invaded the hill country (Jos 10:9). Judah was thus geographically well out of the mainstream of Israelite life, since only the territory of Simeon lay to the south.<\/p>\n<p>The area occupied by Judah falls easily into three natural regions: the central mountain ridge, fairly densely settled, especially on its western side, where rainfall and dew were greatest; the eastern slopes, almost uninhabited and mostly desert; and the southern pastoral region round Beersheba, where the mountains fall away into dry prairie, with sparse settlement throughout.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EconomicLife\">Economic Life<\/p>\n<p>To Israel, Palestine was a land flowing with milk and honey (Nm 13:27). Half of Judah might be desert, but the rest had reasonably good soil, and on the western slopes the rain was usually adequate. Wheat, barley, olives, figs, and especially vineyards, grew freely. The land might be stony, but stones could be collected and used for walls and buildings. Not as rich as the great northern valleys like Jezreel, Judah was still good mixed farming country, although it required hard work. Sheep and goats were plentiful, and that meant wool and milk. Cattle were probably rarer; Judah was not cattle country like Bashan (Nm 32:1). Wool meant cloth, and hide meant leather. In those days the hills were forested, which meant fuel and building materials. Clay for pottery was readily available for domestic utensils. Copper came from Edom in the south, and iron from Philistia in the west; these could be obtained by bartering agricultural produce. Whether they realized it or not, God had dealt graciously with the people of Judah in giving them adequate resources. Nonetheless, the climate was bracing: a cold, wet winter, with snow and hail at times, and a long, rainless summer, with low humidity and cool nights. This brought heavy dews on the eastern slopes (Jgs 6:38), and precious rainwater was conserved in rock-hewn cisterns (Jer 2:13). Permanent streams of any size did not exist in Judah, but springs or “wells” were abundant, from Jerusalem to Beersheba. It was not until Judah got caught up into the economic life of Solomon’s trading empire that its simple pattern of life changed; even then, the change in the hills of Judah was far less than elsewhere. Judah had no seaport of its own and controlled no rich caravan routes. It had no coveted raw materials, like the copper of Edom or the cedars of Lebanon; no luxury goods for trade, like the purple dye of Phoenicia or the gold of Ophir; no lush land to tempt the greed of others. In God’s mercy Judah’s temptations were few. Its faith was also less liable to be corrupted: comparatively few Canaanites had ever settled in this area, while the Conquest had been more thorough in the south than in the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoryandSignificance\">History and Significance<\/p>\n<p>The earliest blessings on Judah are recorded in Genesis 49:8-12 and Deuteronomy 33:7. After the exodus, the tribe of Judah took first place in the desert camping arrangement (Nm 2:3). Caleb, one of the two faithful spies, was a tribal chieftain of Judah (13:6). In Joshua’s invasion of Palestine, the highlands allotted to Judah were the first to be cleared of Canaanites, after the initial fighting around Jericho and Ai (Jos 6; 8). The book of Joshua is a summary account of the whole campaign.<\/p>\n\n<p>After Joshua’s death, Simeon and Judah continued the fight against the Canaanites and marched together against the hill country of the south, led by Caleb and Othniel. Although God’s gift to Judah had been the whole land westward as far as the sea, Judah failed to take anything but the hills. The plain was controlled by iron-protected chariots and fortress cities. The king of Jerusalem was killed and Jerusalem was burned (Jgs 1:8), but the Jebusites continued to occupy the area until David’s day (v 21). The men of Judah, like other Israelites, might burn Canaanite towns, but they did not usually occupy the old sites themselves. Under the judges, the tribe of Judah was still isolated, though Othniel was of Judah (ch 3). In the great battle against Sisera, Judah is not even mentioned (ch 5). This tribal isolation was soon lost, first through Philistine invasions from the west, and then through David’s capture of Jerusalem and the placing of the national and religious capital there. Although in Judges 15:11 the men of Judah are prepared even to hand over Samson to the Philistines, with Samuel as judge, everything changes. The ark returns (1 Sm 7:1); lost territory is regained (v 14). Indeed, Samuel’s sons act as judges in Beersheba (8:2), although they are corrupt.<\/p>\n<p>David finally breaks the power of the Philistines in a series of victories and rules as king first in Hebron, Judah’s chief town (2 Sm 2:1-4). When he is crowned king of all Israel, however, he moves the capital to the newly conquered Jerusalem, on the northern frontier of the tribe of Judah (5:6-10). Here the ark was to be brought (ch 6), and here Solomon was to build the temple (7:13). All God’s promises will henceforth cluster around Jerusalem, the temple, and David’s line. Most important, the Messiah would come from Judah (Gn 49:10).<\/p>\n<p>The division between the northern and southern tribes had begun in David’s lifetime, after Absalom’s revolt (2 Sm 20:1); after Solomon’s death, the rift became complete (1 Kgs 12:16). Henceforth for 200 years, until the fall of the northern kingdom in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, there were two little kingdoms side by side: a larger one in the north and east, called Israel (the “ten tribes” of 1 Kgs 11:35), and a smaller one in the south, called Judah. With this, the history of Judah as a tribe virtually comes to an end, for although still called by the old tribal name, this little kingdom was really a “Greater Judah.” It now contained not only the old tribe of Judah but also the newly conquered Jebusite territory of Jerusalem, some of the old Philistine country, and the tribes of Benjamin and Simeon, as well as many Levites (2 Chr 11:14) and other “loyalists” from the north. Indeed, from now on, “tribe” had far less meaning than before; it was more important where a person lived than of what tribe the person was, although, within the family, tribal origins continued to be remembered. For 250 more years the little kingdom of Judah persisted alone. Even after the exile it was the tiny province of Judah that emerged under Nehemiah (Neh 1:2-3), and Judea still remained as a district in NT days (Lk 3:1). In fact, the vast majority of later Jews were of the tribe of Judah, as the very name “Jew” shows. But the chief glory of the tribe of Judah, now as ever, was that the house of David sprang from it. When Jesus Christ was born, he was to be of David’s line and Judah’s tribe. So it is that in Revelation 7:5, when 12,000 are sealed from each tribe, Judah has pride of place in the list, as it had in Numbers (Nm 2:3) so long before.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judah (Person) #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDAH, Tribe of One of the 12 tribes of Israel. Geographical Territory The frontiers of Judah are well defined in Joshua 15, which describes the inheritance of the tribe after the Conquest. Second Kings 23:8 describes Judah as extending from Geba to Beersheba: Geba is about 8 miles (13 kilometers) north of Jerusalem, and Beersheba about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south. Judah thus held a strip of mountain land on the central spine of southern Palestine, about 50 miles (80 kilometers) from north...","summary_en":"JUDAH, Tribe of One of the 12 tribes of Israel. Geographical Territory The frontiers of Judah are well defined in Joshua 15, which describes the inheritance of the tribe after the Conquest. Second Kings 23:8 describes Judah as extending from Geba to Beersheba: Geba is about 8 miles (13 kilometers) north of Jerusalem, and Beersheba about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south. Judah thus held a strip of mountain land on the central spine of southern Palestine, about 50 miles (80 kilometers) from north...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45457,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:9","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> Joshua’s army walked <em>all night<\/em> to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking <em>the Amorite armies<\/em> from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> Joshua’s army walked <em>all night<\/em> to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking <em>the Amorite armies<\/em> from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:9 Joshua’s army walked all night to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking the Amorite armies from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.","summary_en":"10:9 Joshua’s army walked all night to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking the Amorite armies from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73083,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:9","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> Joshua’s army walked <em>all night<\/em> to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking <em>the Amorite armies<\/em> from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> Joshua’s army walked <em>all night<\/em> to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking <em>the Amorite armies<\/em> from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:9 Joshua’s army walked all night to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking the Amorite armies from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.","summary_en":"10:9 Joshua’s army walked all night to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking the Amorite armies from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100709,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:9","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> Joshua’s army walked <em>all night<\/em> to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking <em>the Amorite armies<\/em> from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> Joshua’s army walked <em>all night<\/em> to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking <em>the Amorite armies<\/em> from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:9 Joshua’s army walked all night to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking the Amorite armies from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.","summary_en":"10:9 Joshua’s army walked all night to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking the Amorite armies from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128335,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:9","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> Joshua’s army walked <em>all night<\/em> to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking <em>the Amorite armies<\/em> from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:9<\/strong> Joshua’s army walked <em>all night<\/em> to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking <em>the Amorite armies<\/em> from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:9 Joshua’s army walked all night to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking the Amorite armies from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.","summary_en":"10:9 Joshua’s army walked all night to travel the fifteen miles up the rugged passes and steep slopes and across the plateau. By attacking the Amorite armies from the east at sunrise, Joshua’s army came out of the sun, blinding the Amorites as they faced eastward to fight. • Israel’s covenant required the nation to respond to Gibeon’s plea for help, but Joshua responded more promptly than any treaty required. Defeating the Canaanite force with a swift strike gave Israel a tremendous advantage.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63766,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Fearing People","title_en":"Fearing People","content_ro":"<h3>Fearing People<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied against him, he trembled in fear (Isa 7:2). The Lord encouraged him to be a man of faith, because without faith he could not expect the Lord’s protection (7:9). However, Ahaz refused to trust the Lord. Rather, he turned to the Assyrians for help. As a result, the Lord became a trap for him, as well as for all Israel and Judah (8:11-15).<\/p>\n<p>One of the purposes of Isaiah’s message was to highlight the contrast between faith and fear. We see Ahaz as an example of fear. We then see Hezekiah as an imperfect example of faith (see ch 37). Isaiah himself provides a better example of faith (ch 8). Finally, God’s servant stands as the ideal example of faith (42:1-7; 50:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus instructed his followers not to fear those who threaten them—even those who wish to kill them (Matt 10:26-31). The same God who is aware of the happenings of each individual sparrow and who knows the number of hairs on a person’s head will be with those who trust in him. Such trust has been demonstrated by believers throughout history who have rejected the fear of what others can do to them—even to the point of martyrdom (see Acts 6:8–7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not commit themselves wholly to God will live in fear of others. But those who rely on the Lord will be able to overcome such fear, recognizing the temporality of human foes and the enduring sovereignty of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 14:1-12; 21:34-35; Josh 1:9; 2 Kgs 16:5-18; 2 Chr 28:16-23; Ps 23:4; Prov 29:25; Isa 7:1-25; 41:10; 51:7-8, 12-13; 54:4; 57:11; Jer 10:5; 30:10; 46:27-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Fearing People<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied against him, he trembled in fear (Isa 7:2). The Lord encouraged him to be a man of faith, because without faith he could not expect the Lord’s protection (7:9). However, Ahaz refused to trust the Lord. Rather, he turned to the Assyrians for help. As a result, the Lord became a trap for him, as well as for all Israel and Judah (8:11-15).<\/p>\n<p>One of the purposes of Isaiah’s message was to highlight the contrast between faith and fear. We see Ahaz as an example of fear. We then see Hezekiah as an imperfect example of faith (see ch 37). Isaiah himself provides a better example of faith (ch 8). Finally, God’s servant stands as the ideal example of faith (42:1-7; 50:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus instructed his followers not to fear those who threaten them—even those who wish to kill them (Matt 10:26-31). The same God who is aware of the happenings of each individual sparrow and who knows the number of hairs on a person’s head will be with those who trust in him. Such trust has been demonstrated by believers throughout history who have rejected the fear of what others can do to them—even to the point of martyrdom (see Acts 6:8–7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not commit themselves wholly to God will live in fear of others. But those who rely on the Lord will be able to overcome such fear, recognizing the temporality of human foes and the enduring sovereignty of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 14:1-12; 21:34-35; Josh 1:9; 2 Kgs 16:5-18; 2 Chr 28:16-23; Ps 23:4; Prov 29:25; Isa 7:1-25; 41:10; 51:7-8, 12-13; 54:4; 57:11; Jer 10:5; 30:10; 46:27-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"Fearing People God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14). During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied aga...","summary_en":"Fearing People God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14). During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied aga...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91392,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Fearing People","title_en":"Fearing People","content_ro":"<h3>Fearing People<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied against him, he trembled in fear (Isa 7:2). The Lord encouraged him to be a man of faith, because without faith he could not expect the Lord’s protection (7:9). However, Ahaz refused to trust the Lord. Rather, he turned to the Assyrians for help. As a result, the Lord became a trap for him, as well as for all Israel and Judah (8:11-15).<\/p>\n<p>One of the purposes of Isaiah’s message was to highlight the contrast between faith and fear. We see Ahaz as an example of fear. We then see Hezekiah as an imperfect example of faith (see ch 37). Isaiah himself provides a better example of faith (ch 8). Finally, God’s servant stands as the ideal example of faith (42:1-7; 50:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus instructed his followers not to fear those who threaten them—even those who wish to kill them (Matt 10:26-31). The same God who is aware of the happenings of each individual sparrow and who knows the number of hairs on a person’s head will be with those who trust in him. Such trust has been demonstrated by believers throughout history who have rejected the fear of what others can do to them—even to the point of martyrdom (see Acts 6:8–7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not commit themselves wholly to God will live in fear of others. But those who rely on the Lord will be able to overcome such fear, recognizing the temporality of human foes and the enduring sovereignty of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 14:1-12; 21:34-35; Josh 1:9; 2 Kgs 16:5-18; 2 Chr 28:16-23; Ps 23:4; Prov 29:25; Isa 7:1-25; 41:10; 51:7-8, 12-13; 54:4; 57:11; Jer 10:5; 30:10; 46:27-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Fearing People<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied against him, he trembled in fear (Isa 7:2). The Lord encouraged him to be a man of faith, because without faith he could not expect the Lord’s protection (7:9). However, Ahaz refused to trust the Lord. Rather, he turned to the Assyrians for help. As a result, the Lord became a trap for him, as well as for all Israel and Judah (8:11-15).<\/p>\n<p>One of the purposes of Isaiah’s message was to highlight the contrast between faith and fear. We see Ahaz as an example of fear. We then see Hezekiah as an imperfect example of faith (see ch 37). Isaiah himself provides a better example of faith (ch 8). Finally, God’s servant stands as the ideal example of faith (42:1-7; 50:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus instructed his followers not to fear those who threaten them—even those who wish to kill them (Matt 10:26-31). The same God who is aware of the happenings of each individual sparrow and who knows the number of hairs on a person’s head will be with those who trust in him. Such trust has been demonstrated by believers throughout history who have rejected the fear of what others can do to them—even to the point of martyrdom (see Acts 6:8–7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not commit themselves wholly to God will live in fear of others. But those who rely on the Lord will be able to overcome such fear, recognizing the temporality of human foes and the enduring sovereignty of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 14:1-12; 21:34-35; Josh 1:9; 2 Kgs 16:5-18; 2 Chr 28:16-23; Ps 23:4; Prov 29:25; Isa 7:1-25; 41:10; 51:7-8, 12-13; 54:4; 57:11; Jer 10:5; 30:10; 46:27-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"Fearing People God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14). During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied aga...","summary_en":"Fearing People God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14). During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied aga...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119018,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Fearing People","title_en":"Fearing People","content_ro":"<h3>Fearing People<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied against him, he trembled in fear (Isa 7:2). The Lord encouraged him to be a man of faith, because without faith he could not expect the Lord’s protection (7:9). However, Ahaz refused to trust the Lord. Rather, he turned to the Assyrians for help. As a result, the Lord became a trap for him, as well as for all Israel and Judah (8:11-15).<\/p>\n<p>One of the purposes of Isaiah’s message was to highlight the contrast between faith and fear. We see Ahaz as an example of fear. We then see Hezekiah as an imperfect example of faith (see ch 37). Isaiah himself provides a better example of faith (ch 8). Finally, God’s servant stands as the ideal example of faith (42:1-7; 50:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus instructed his followers not to fear those who threaten them—even those who wish to kill them (Matt 10:26-31). The same God who is aware of the happenings of each individual sparrow and who knows the number of hairs on a person’s head will be with those who trust in him. Such trust has been demonstrated by believers throughout history who have rejected the fear of what others can do to them—even to the point of martyrdom (see Acts 6:8–7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not commit themselves wholly to God will live in fear of others. But those who rely on the Lord will be able to overcome such fear, recognizing the temporality of human foes and the enduring sovereignty of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 14:1-12; 21:34-35; Josh 1:9; 2 Kgs 16:5-18; 2 Chr 28:16-23; Ps 23:4; Prov 29:25; Isa 7:1-25; 41:10; 51:7-8, 12-13; 54:4; 57:11; Jer 10:5; 30:10; 46:27-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Fearing People<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied against him, he trembled in fear (Isa 7:2). The Lord encouraged him to be a man of faith, because without faith he could not expect the Lord’s protection (7:9). However, Ahaz refused to trust the Lord. Rather, he turned to the Assyrians for help. As a result, the Lord became a trap for him, as well as for all Israel and Judah (8:11-15).<\/p>\n<p>One of the purposes of Isaiah’s message was to highlight the contrast between faith and fear. We see Ahaz as an example of fear. We then see Hezekiah as an imperfect example of faith (see ch 37). Isaiah himself provides a better example of faith (ch 8). Finally, God’s servant stands as the ideal example of faith (42:1-7; 50:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus instructed his followers not to fear those who threaten them—even those who wish to kill them (Matt 10:26-31). The same God who is aware of the happenings of each individual sparrow and who knows the number of hairs on a person’s head will be with those who trust in him. Such trust has been demonstrated by believers throughout history who have rejected the fear of what others can do to them—even to the point of martyrdom (see Acts 6:8–7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not commit themselves wholly to God will live in fear of others. But those who rely on the Lord will be able to overcome such fear, recognizing the temporality of human foes and the enduring sovereignty of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 14:1-12; 21:34-35; Josh 1:9; 2 Kgs 16:5-18; 2 Chr 28:16-23; Ps 23:4; Prov 29:25; Isa 7:1-25; 41:10; 51:7-8, 12-13; 54:4; 57:11; Jer 10:5; 30:10; 46:27-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"Fearing People God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14). During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied aga...","summary_en":"Fearing People God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14). During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied aga...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146644,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Fearing People","title_en":"Fearing People","content_ro":"<h3>Fearing People<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied against him, he trembled in fear (Isa 7:2). The Lord encouraged him to be a man of faith, because without faith he could not expect the Lord’s protection (7:9). However, Ahaz refused to trust the Lord. Rather, he turned to the Assyrians for help. As a result, the Lord became a trap for him, as well as for all Israel and Judah (8:11-15).<\/p>\n<p>One of the purposes of Isaiah’s message was to highlight the contrast between faith and fear. We see Ahaz as an example of fear. We then see Hezekiah as an imperfect example of faith (see ch 37). Isaiah himself provides a better example of faith (ch 8). Finally, God’s servant stands as the ideal example of faith (42:1-7; 50:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus instructed his followers not to fear those who threaten them—even those who wish to kill them (Matt 10:26-31). The same God who is aware of the happenings of each individual sparrow and who knows the number of hairs on a person’s head will be with those who trust in him. Such trust has been demonstrated by believers throughout history who have rejected the fear of what others can do to them—even to the point of martyrdom (see Acts 6:8–7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not commit themselves wholly to God will live in fear of others. But those who rely on the Lord will be able to overcome such fear, recognizing the temporality of human foes and the enduring sovereignty of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 14:1-12; 21:34-35; Josh 1:9; 2 Kgs 16:5-18; 2 Chr 28:16-23; Ps 23:4; Prov 29:25; Isa 7:1-25; 41:10; 51:7-8, 12-13; 54:4; 57:11; Jer 10:5; 30:10; 46:27-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Fearing People<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14).<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied against him, he trembled in fear (Isa 7:2). The Lord encouraged him to be a man of faith, because without faith he could not expect the Lord’s protection (7:9). However, Ahaz refused to trust the Lord. Rather, he turned to the Assyrians for help. As a result, the Lord became a trap for him, as well as for all Israel and Judah (8:11-15).<\/p>\n<p>One of the purposes of Isaiah’s message was to highlight the contrast between faith and fear. We see Ahaz as an example of fear. We then see Hezekiah as an imperfect example of faith (see ch 37). Isaiah himself provides a better example of faith (ch 8). Finally, God’s servant stands as the ideal example of faith (42:1-7; 50:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus instructed his followers not to fear those who threaten them—even those who wish to kill them (Matt 10:26-31). The same God who is aware of the happenings of each individual sparrow and who knows the number of hairs on a person’s head will be with those who trust in him. Such trust has been demonstrated by believers throughout history who have rejected the fear of what others can do to them—even to the point of martyrdom (see Acts 6:8–7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not commit themselves wholly to God will live in fear of others. But those who rely on the Lord will be able to overcome such fear, recognizing the temporality of human foes and the enduring sovereignty of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 14:1-12; 21:34-35; Josh 1:9; 2 Kgs 16:5-18; 2 Chr 28:16-23; Ps 23:4; Prov 29:25; Isa 7:1-25; 41:10; 51:7-8, 12-13; 54:4; 57:11; Jer 10:5; 30:10; 46:27-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"Fearing People God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14). During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied aga...","summary_en":"Fearing People God had promised to be with his people in the face of opposition (see, e.g., Deut 20:1-4; Josh 1:9); as long as they remained committed to him, they had no reason to fear others. Israel’s history demonstrated this reality (see Exod 14:10-31; Josh 10:9-14). But for those who look elsewhere for peace and security, God can be a stumbling stone rather than a source of safety (Isa 8:14). During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, when the king heard that Syria and Israel had allied aga...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":3307,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Azekah","title_en":"Azekah","content_ro":"<h3>AZEKAH<\/h3>\n<p>Town in the agricultural plain known as the Shephelah. It existed at least as early as the conquest of Canaan (the Promised Land), since Joshua drove the confederation of Amorite kings to Azekah (Jos 10:10, 22). It is also mentioned in connection with the encounter of David and Goliath (1 Sm 17:1). Archaeological excavations have shown that Azekah was heavily fortified with a system of underground refuge chambers (2 Chr 11:9, 11). Azekah, Lachish, and Jerusalem are mentioned as the only remaining walled cities of the southern kingdom of Judah at the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s assault on Jerusalem (Jer 34:7). Azekah was resettled by some who returned from the Babylonian exile (Neh 11:30). Today it is known as Tell Zakariyeh.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AZEKAH<\/h3>\n<p>Town in the agricultural plain known as the Shephelah. It existed at least as early as the conquest of Canaan (the Promised Land), since Joshua drove the confederation of Amorite kings to Azekah (Jos 10:10, 22). It is also mentioned in connection with the encounter of David and Goliath (1 Sm 17:1). Archaeological excavations have shown that Azekah was heavily fortified with a system of underground refuge chambers (2 Chr 11:9, 11). Azekah, Lachish, and Jerusalem are mentioned as the only remaining walled cities of the southern kingdom of Judah at the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s assault on Jerusalem (Jer 34:7). Azekah was resettled by some who returned from the Babylonian exile (Neh 11:30). Today it is known as Tell Zakariyeh.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AZEKAH Town in the agricultural plain known as the Shephelah. It existed at least as early as the conquest of Canaan (the Promised Land), since Joshua drove the confederation of Amorite kings to Azekah (Jos 10:10, 22). It is also mentioned in connection with the encounter of David and Goliath (1 Sm 17:1). Archaeological excavations have shown that Azekah was heavily fortified with a system of underground refuge chambers (2 Chr 11:9, 11). Azekah, Lachish, and Jerusalem are mentioned as the onl...","summary_en":"AZEKAH Town in the agricultural plain known as the Shephelah. It existed at least as early as the conquest of Canaan (the Promised Land), since Joshua drove the confederation of Amorite kings to Azekah (Jos 10:10, 22). It is also mentioned in connection with the encounter of David and Goliath (1 Sm 17:1). Archaeological excavations have shown that Azekah was heavily fortified with a system of underground refuge chambers (2 Chr 11:9, 11). Azekah, Lachish, and Jerusalem are mentioned as the onl...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20670,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23998,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Makkedah","title_en":"Makkedah","content_ro":"<h3>MAKKEDAH<\/h3>\n<p>One of the Shephelah towns conquered during the southern campaign led by Joshua (Jos 10:10-29; 12:16). It belonged to the same district as Lachish (15:41). Eusebius placed it eight Roman miles east of Eleutheropolis (Beth-guvrin), which would lead to Beit-Maqdum, a Roman-Byzantine ruin beside the Roman road from Eleutheropolis to Hebron. The biblical site may have been at Khirbet el-Qom about one-half mile (.8 kilometer) to the southwest.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MAKKEDAH<\/h3>\n<p>One of the Shephelah towns conquered during the southern campaign led by Joshua (Jos 10:10-29; 12:16). It belonged to the same district as Lachish (15:41). Eusebius placed it eight Roman miles east of Eleutheropolis (Beth-guvrin), which would lead to Beit-Maqdum, a Roman-Byzantine ruin beside the Roman road from Eleutheropolis to Hebron. The biblical site may have been at Khirbet el-Qom about one-half mile (.8 kilometer) to the southwest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MAKKEDAH One of the Shephelah towns conquered during the southern campaign led by Joshua (Jos 10:10-29; 12:16). It belonged to the same district as Lachish (15:41). Eusebius placed it eight Roman miles east of Eleutheropolis (Beth-guvrin), which would lead to Beit-Maqdum, a Roman-Byzantine ruin beside the Roman road from Eleutheropolis to Hebron. The biblical site may have been at Khirbet el-Qom about one-half mile (.8 kilometer) to the southwest.","summary_en":"MAKKEDAH One of the Shephelah towns conquered during the southern campaign led by Joshua (Jos 10:10-29; 12:16). It belonged to the same district as Lachish (15:41). Eusebius placed it eight Roman miles east of Eleutheropolis (Beth-guvrin), which would lead to Beit-Maqdum, a Roman-Byzantine ruin beside the Roman road from Eleutheropolis to Hebron. The biblical site may have been at Khirbet el-Qom about one-half mile (.8 kilometer) to the southwest.","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38113,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"War*, Holy","title_en":"War*, Holy","content_ro":"<h3>WAR*, Holy<\/h3>\n<p>Warfare as described in the book of Deuteronomy, especially in chapter 20. Not merely a human enterprise fought by kings with trained soldiers and military equipment, it is God’s war in which he himself is involved together with his covenant people who are selected to fight in his name. The size of the army is not important; indeed, sometimes the numbers were pared down to dramatize the fact that the victory was gained, not by military superiority, but by the action of God against his enemies. When Israel lived in obedience to God as his covenant people and went into battle under his direction, war was within the will of God, commanded by him, and accomplished through trust in him. God was known as “a man of war,” and it is declared that “the battle is the Lord’s” (1 Sm 17:47; cf. 18:17; 25:28). With this faith on the part of the Jews, it is easy to see how a concept of holy war developed, especially when they had the conviction that their enemies were God’s enemies and that they were the people through whom God would carry out his saving purposes for the world.<\/p>\n<p>Moses believed that God declared war and sent his people into battle (Ex 17:16; Nm 31:3). On several occasions, at crucial points in warfare, the “terror of the Lord” fell upon the enemy, enabling the numerically inferior army of Israel to gain an easy victory over vastly superior forces (Jos 10:10-14; Jgs 4:12-16; 2 Sm 5:24-25). In a time of acute military crisis, Elisha was enabled to see the heavenly army of Yahweh drawn up on the hills around Samaria, ready to defeat the fierce, invading armies of Syria. In response to Elisha’s prayer, the Syrian soldiers were struck with blindness and rendered helpless against the Israelites (2 Kgs 6:15-23). Various means were used to determine the will of God and to assure his active participation in war. In addition to the word of the prophet (1 Kgs 22:5-23), Urim and Thummim (Ex 28:30; Lv 8:8), the ephod (1 Sm 30:7), and the ark of the covenant were employed for this purpose. The leaders of God’s troops constantly sought his direction for military strategy during the progress of battle, for no step was to be taken without divine approval and guidance (2 Sm 5:19-23).<\/p>\n<p>Since God gave Palestine to his own people, the Jews, the land was indeed the Promised Land; it belonged by divine covenant to Israel and was in that sense “the Holy Land.” Any defense of that land against foreign invasion was a holy war. The invading enemy was trespassing upon sacred territory that belonged to God’s people by immutable decree and thus incurred the divine wrath. From this perspective the complete destruction of Israel’s enemies was necessary, particularly when the enemy was pagan and morally corrupt. A characteristic Hebrew word used for this concept, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">herem<\/span><em>,<\/em> originally meant “devoted” and came to mean “devoted to destruction” as something hostile to the rule of God (Jos 6:17-18). The divine plan must not be thwarted, obstructed, or aborted by any debasing idolatry or corrupting immorality (Dt 7). Enemy cities within the boundaries of the land promised to the Jews were to be utterly destroyed—a practice known as “the ban.” Only silver, gold, and vessels of bronze and iron were to be spared. They were to be placed in the treasury of the Lord as sacred to him (Jos 6:17-21; 1 Sm 15:3).<\/p>\n<p>There was a distinctly teleological aspect to the concept of holy war. It looked beyond the triumphs of God in specific battles to the conclusion of all hostilities and to a final time of peace that will vindicate the righteousness and sovereignty of God’s saving purposes and display his concern and goal for his own people. The final consummation will be preceded by a massive holy war, after which the weapons of warfare will be transformed into implements of peace (Is 2:4; Mi 4:3) under the reign of the Messiah, the Prince of Peace (Is 9:6), who will subdue all God’s enemies in a triumphant Day of the Lord (Ps 110; Dn 7; Zec 14).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WAR*, Holy<\/h3>\n<p>Warfare as described in the book of Deuteronomy, especially in chapter 20. Not merely a human enterprise fought by kings with trained soldiers and military equipment, it is God’s war in which he himself is involved together with his covenant people who are selected to fight in his name. The size of the army is not important; indeed, sometimes the numbers were pared down to dramatize the fact that the victory was gained, not by military superiority, but by the action of God against his enemies. When Israel lived in obedience to God as his covenant people and went into battle under his direction, war was within the will of God, commanded by him, and accomplished through trust in him. God was known as “a man of war,” and it is declared that “the battle is the Lord’s” (1 Sm 17:47; cf. 18:17; 25:28). With this faith on the part of the Jews, it is easy to see how a concept of holy war developed, especially when they had the conviction that their enemies were God’s enemies and that they were the people through whom God would carry out his saving purposes for the world.<\/p>\n<p>Moses believed that God declared war and sent his people into battle (Ex 17:16; Nm 31:3). On several occasions, at crucial points in warfare, the “terror of the Lord” fell upon the enemy, enabling the numerically inferior army of Israel to gain an easy victory over vastly superior forces (Jos 10:10-14; Jgs 4:12-16; 2 Sm 5:24-25). In a time of acute military crisis, Elisha was enabled to see the heavenly army of Yahweh drawn up on the hills around Samaria, ready to defeat the fierce, invading armies of Syria. In response to Elisha’s prayer, the Syrian soldiers were struck with blindness and rendered helpless against the Israelites (2 Kgs 6:15-23). Various means were used to determine the will of God and to assure his active participation in war. In addition to the word of the prophet (1 Kgs 22:5-23), Urim and Thummim (Ex 28:30; Lv 8:8), the ephod (1 Sm 30:7), and the ark of the covenant were employed for this purpose. The leaders of God’s troops constantly sought his direction for military strategy during the progress of battle, for no step was to be taken without divine approval and guidance (2 Sm 5:19-23).<\/p>\n<p>Since God gave Palestine to his own people, the Jews, the land was indeed the Promised Land; it belonged by divine covenant to Israel and was in that sense “the Holy Land.” Any defense of that land against foreign invasion was a holy war. The invading enemy was trespassing upon sacred territory that belonged to God’s people by immutable decree and thus incurred the divine wrath. From this perspective the complete destruction of Israel’s enemies was necessary, particularly when the enemy was pagan and morally corrupt. A characteristic Hebrew word used for this concept, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">herem<\/span><em>,<\/em> originally meant “devoted” and came to mean “devoted to destruction” as something hostile to the rule of God (Jos 6:17-18). The divine plan must not be thwarted, obstructed, or aborted by any debasing idolatry or corrupting immorality (Dt 7). Enemy cities within the boundaries of the land promised to the Jews were to be utterly destroyed—a practice known as “the ban.” Only silver, gold, and vessels of bronze and iron were to be spared. They were to be placed in the treasury of the Lord as sacred to him (Jos 6:17-21; 1 Sm 15:3).<\/p>\n<p>There was a distinctly teleological aspect to the concept of holy war. It looked beyond the triumphs of God in specific battles to the conclusion of all hostilities and to a final time of peace that will vindicate the righteousness and sovereignty of God’s saving purposes and display his concern and goal for his own people. The final consummation will be preceded by a massive holy war, after which the weapons of warfare will be transformed into implements of peace (Is 2:4; Mi 4:3) under the reign of the Messiah, the Prince of Peace (Is 9:6), who will subdue all God’s enemies in a triumphant Day of the Lord (Ps 110; Dn 7; Zec 14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WAR*, Holy Warfare as described in the book of Deuteronomy, especially in chapter 20. Not merely a human enterprise fought by kings with trained soldiers and military equipment, it is God’s war in which he himself is involved together with his covenant people who are selected to fight in his name. The size of the army is not important; indeed, sometimes the numbers were pared down to dramatize the fact that the victory was gained, not by military superiority, but by the action of God against ...","summary_en":"WAR*, Holy Warfare as described in the book of Deuteronomy, especially in chapter 20. Not merely a human enterprise fought by kings with trained soldiers and military equipment, it is God’s war in which he himself is involved together with his covenant people who are selected to fight in his name. The size of the army is not important; indeed, sometimes the numbers were pared down to dramatize the fact that the victory was gained, not by military superiority, but by the action of God against ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45458,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:10-13<\/strong> Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:10-13<\/strong> Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:10-13 Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.","summary_en":"10:10-13 Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45459,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:10<\/strong> It was about forty miles from <em>Gibeon<\/em><em>,<\/em> down the <em>Beth-horon<\/em> road, then south through the western foothills to <em>Azekah and Makkedah.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:10<\/strong> It was about forty miles from <em>Gibeon<\/em><em>,<\/em> down the <em>Beth-horon<\/em> road, then south through the western foothills to <em>Azekah and Makkedah.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"10:10 It was about forty miles from Gibeon, down the Beth-horon road, then south through the western foothills to Azekah and Makkedah.","summary_en":"10:10 It was about forty miles from Gibeon, down the Beth-horon road, then south through the western foothills to Azekah and Makkedah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73084,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:10-13<\/strong> Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:10-13<\/strong> Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:10-13 Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.","summary_en":"10:10-13 Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73085,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:10<\/strong> It was about forty miles from <em>Gibeon<\/em><em>,<\/em> down the <em>Beth-horon<\/em> road, then south through the western foothills to <em>Azekah and Makkedah.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:10<\/strong> It was about forty miles from <em>Gibeon<\/em><em>,<\/em> down the <em>Beth-horon<\/em> road, then south through the western foothills to <em>Azekah and Makkedah.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"10:10 It was about forty miles from Gibeon, down the Beth-horon road, then south through the western foothills to Azekah and Makkedah.","summary_en":"10:10 It was about forty miles from Gibeon, down the Beth-horon road, then south through the western foothills to Azekah and Makkedah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100710,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:10-13<\/strong> Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:10-13<\/strong> Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:10-13 Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.","summary_en":"10:10-13 Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100711,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:10<\/strong> It was about forty miles from <em>Gibeon<\/em><em>,<\/em> down the <em>Beth-horon<\/em> road, then south through the western foothills to <em>Azekah and Makkedah.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:10<\/strong> It was about forty miles from <em>Gibeon<\/em><em>,<\/em> down the <em>Beth-horon<\/em> road, then south through the western foothills to <em>Azekah and Makkedah.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"10:10 It was about forty miles from Gibeon, down the Beth-horon road, then south through the western foothills to Azekah and Makkedah.","summary_en":"10:10 It was about forty miles from Gibeon, down the Beth-horon road, then south through the western foothills to Azekah and Makkedah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128336,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:10-13<\/strong> Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:10-13<\/strong> Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:10-13 Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.","summary_en":"10:10-13 Three miracles—supernatural panic, a terrible hailstorm, and a lengthened day—demonstrated that the destruction of the Canaanites was entirely God’s doing.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128337,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:10","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:10<\/strong> It was about forty miles from <em>Gibeon<\/em><em>,<\/em> down the <em>Beth-horon<\/em> road, then south through the western foothills to <em>Azekah and Makkedah.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:10<\/strong> It was about forty miles from <em>Gibeon<\/em><em>,<\/em> down the <em>Beth-horon<\/em> road, then south through the western foothills to <em>Azekah and Makkedah.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"10:10 It was about forty miles from Gibeon, down the Beth-horon road, then south through the western foothills to Azekah and Makkedah.","summary_en":"10:10 It was about forty miles from Gibeon, down the Beth-horon road, then south through the western foothills to Azekah and Makkedah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":15788,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heaven","title_en":"Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","summary_en":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20779,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30523,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Plagues upon Egypt","title_en":"Plagues upon Egypt","content_ro":"<h3>PLAGUES UPON EGYPT<\/h3>\n<p>Unprecedented series of disasters striking Egypt, probably culminating in spring or early summer (c. 1400 <span>BC<\/span>). They struck particularly the Nile Delta, although apparently not affecting the area called Goshen. These disasters were of such magnitude that the Egyptians from their earliest history could recall nothing like them (Ex 9:24).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Plagues<\/p>\n<p>• Pharaoh and the Plagues<\/p>\n<p>• The Nature of the Plagues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePlagues\">The Plagues<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are described in Exodus 7–11. At first sight one might imagine that the plagues took place in succession within a few weeks, but casual notes of time (see 7:25; 9:31-32), as well as the nature of some of the plagues, would suggest that several months may well have been involved. The first plague was the turning of water into blood (7:20), so that the fish died and the water stank. Next came a plague of frogs (8:6); even after their death, the land was strewn with piles of their bodies (v 14). Next came a plague of lice (v 17), or possibly gnats, sandflies, or mosquitoes. The exact sense of the word is not clear, but it obviously means some small irritating creature. After that came “swarms of flies” (v 24). Again, the meaning is not quite clear. Later Jewish tradition made it swarms of wild beasts, but flies is a much more likely sense. Then some sort of cattle plague struck (9:3), affecting the domestic animals. After that came boils on humans (v 9), boils that erupted into painful blisters and vesicles, apparently irritating rather than fatal. Hail followed (v 18), so severe that nothing like it had been seen before—hail associated with thunder and lightning (v 24). This was so heavy that it could be fatal (v 19), and naturally did great harm to the crops of Egypt (v 31). After that came locusts in vast numbers (10:13)—again on an unparalleled scale. Then came three days of complete darkness (v 22) that brought Egyptian life to a standstill. Finally, all the firstborn of the Egyptians died (12:29)—from Pharaoh’s household down to the lowliest homes in the land.<\/p>\n<p>All the plagues are seen in the Bible as successive judgments of God. Normally, each is preceded by a warning from Moses, which is disregarded by Pharaoh, and then each is lifted as a result of temporary repentance on the part of Pharaoh. But it is also clear that the plagues gradually increase in severity and intensity, until the climax comes in the death of the firstborn—with that, even Pharaoh is broken. The first plagues represent discomfort rather than danger for the Egyptians; then their animals and crops are struck down; finally death takes the firstborn, the flower of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>There are certain common features that run through the account of the plagues. At first, Pharaoh’s magicians try to belittle the plagues, and the signs that precede them, by producing similar effects themselves (7:11-12; 8:7). This is an interesting warning that miracles may be produced from various sources and that this sort of sign is therefore not important in itself. But the time comes when the magicians are beaten and can no longer compete (8:18); even they admit that this is God’s hand (v 19). When the plague of boils comes, the magicians cannot even present themselves before Pharaoh, so bad is their condition. After that, the magicians disappear from the story.<\/p>\n<p>Another motif that becomes increasingly clear as the account of the plagues continues, is the increasing emphasis on the way in which God’s people, living in Goshen, were delivered from the plagues that affected the Egyptians. It could be assumed anyway that, as Goshen was not on the Nile, the water that turned to blood and the plague of frogs and mosquitoes might affect them less. But in the case of the later swarms of flies (8:22), the cattle plague (9:4), the hail (v 26), and the darkness (10:23), we are specifically told that Israel was spared; in the case of the death of the firstborn, the Lord “passed over” Israelite homes.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems as if the hearts of all the Egyptians are just as hard as that of the pharaoh (7:13). Yet as the story goes on, his own people keep urging him to yield to God. The magicians admit God’s role in the plague of lice (8:19). Pharaoh’s servants who heeded God’s warning through Moses brought their servants and cattle indoors before the great hailstorms, and thus escaped loss and death (9:20). Only the unbelieving suffered. Finally, Pharaoh’s own servants exhorted him to let Israel go, bluntly telling him that the land was being ruined by his stubbornness (10:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PharaohandthePlagues\">Pharaoh and the Plagues<\/p>\n<p>Pharaoh’s reaction to God’s word is remarkable. Scripture describes the hardness of Pharoah’s heart in three ways. Exodus 7:3 speaks of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart; 7:14 has the neutral statement that Pharaoh’s heart was hardened; and 8:15 has Pharaoh hardening his own heart. Obviously, these all refer to the same process, which must be taken into account in any explanation. Furthermore, Paul must be allowed to have the last word on the matter (Rom 9:18).<\/p>\n<p>But, within this theological framework, there is quite a movement, not merely a succession of shallow repentances designed to secure the removal of the plague, and then a renewed stubbornness, calling down a fresh judgment. There is also a typically Asian bargaining session between Pharaoh and Moses. After Pharaoh’s broken promises to let the people go (8:8), he tries to bargain: the people should sacrifice to God in Egypt, without going at all (v 25); only the men should go (10:11); they should all go, but leave their flocks and herds as hostage (v 24). But there can be no bargaining of this sort in response to the call of God, as Pharaoh was to learn. After the death of the firstborn, he was glad to see the Israelites leave (12:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>In this sense, the whole story of the plagues is a struggle. It has sometimes been seen as the struggle of the prototype prophet, Moses (Dt 18:15), against the prototype king, Pharaoh; while it may be that, it is far more. It is the struggle of Moses, the servant of God, against the magicians. It is the struggle of Moses against mighty Pharaoh, or rather, the confrontation of Pharaoh by God, in the form of the word brought by his servant. At the deepest level, it is a victory won by God over the false gods of Egypt. This gives to many of the stories their peculiar relish. For the Nile is the god Hapi; Hept the frog is a god of fertility and childbirth; Ra the sun (outraged by the darkness) is a god; Hat-hot had the form of a heifer, and Apis that of a bull; the flying hornet symbolized Egypt; and Pharaoh himself was a god. Yet all were helpless before the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePlagues\">The Nature of the Plagues<\/p>\n<p>It is not known how God brought about the plagues, and some may think it vain even to ask, since God is free to use whatever means he pleases. Yet the statement that God turned back the waters of the “Reed Sea” by a strong east wind (Ex 14:21) indicates that God could use natural means to bring about his will. The Hebrew concept of “miracle” was not the same as the modern one, which usually regards miracles as “supernatural” and sees all else as “natural” and thus as nonmiraculous. The Hebrews, however, regarded everything in nature as the work of God; it was only that in certain instances he had acted more “wonderfully” (perhaps one would say more “obviously”) than others. Therefore, there is nothing in any way rationalistic in saying that on this occasion God may have sent a series of “natural” disasters (the sort of disasters to which Egypt was geographically prone) but so heightened them—and sent them in such rapid succession—that they constituted miracles.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the explanations of this sort assume a year of unusual climatic conditions, and in particular, a variation in the annual rise of the Nile. For instance, either an exceptionally low rise of the Nile (leading to red and muddy water) or an exceptionally high rise of the Nile (bringing down red earth from the Ethiopian highlands) have been suggested as explanations of the first plague. If one feels that the description “turned into blood” would be satisfied by thick blood-colored water, then either would be satisfactory. Another attractive suggestion is the multiplication of red plankton in the water. This phenomenon is fairly common across the world, especially in tropical and subtropical areas. This would make the likeness to blood much closer. In either of these cases, death of fish in foul water, and migration of frogs from the river would be understandable. If the Nile was flooding more widely than usual, the plague of frogs would be even more understandable. Some have seen the sudden death of the frogs as due to some type of internal anthrax; and, with piles of stinking frogs’ bodies in the fields, the way was laid wide open both for the carriers of the plagues (flies, etc.) and the plagues that followed.<\/p>\n<p>The next plague, for instance, was one of mosquitoes, sandflies, gnats, or possibly lice. At least the first and the last are potent carriers of disease, and all would cause irritant sores by their bites. The flooding of the stagnant waters of the Nile would give perfect breeding conditions for mosquitoes in particular.<\/p>\n<p>If we are right in assuming that the swarms that followed were swarms of flies, then everything would fit into a divine pattern. Piles of dead frogs, piles of rubbish strewn over the land by the flood (including, no doubt, raw sewage), foul and muddied Nile waters—this would be a prime breeding place for flies. Further, Jewish interpreters suggest that the flies in question were biting or stinging flies (like our gadflies or horseflies). Perhaps these were the agents of the disease of the cattle. Modern interpreters have suggested a particular type of fly, still known in the area, which multiplies very rapidly amid rotting vegetation. The flies and the dust (9:9) between them could have produced that dreaded tropical scourge “prickly heat,” easily becoming infected.<\/p>\n<p>Again, in the providence of God, if the Israelites were not in the Delta area, nor actually living along the Nile itself, but concentrated in the Wadi Tumilat to the east, they would be spared these plagues—a fact that did not escape Pharaoh’s notice (9:7). The miracle thus lay in God’s overruling providence, using his world and its geographic and climatic conditions to do his work of judgment on the stubborn-hearted.<\/p>\n<p>Hail, accompanied by violent thunderstorms (9:24), would be easily explicable (although rare in Egypt), especially in the “funnel” conditions of the Nile Valley, surrounded by hot, dry desert on either side. As to the severity of the hail (more common in Palestine), there are biblical parallels (Jos 10:11). With this plague there is a valuable note of time, given incidentally (Ex 9:31-32) in connection with the crops destroyed by the hail.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of the plague of locusts, God’s use of the elements of nature is made plain in the text, where an “east wind” brings them and a “sea wind” takes them away (10:13, 19). The “plague” here is both the enormous number of locusts (see Jl 1:1-12 for another illustration of this scourge) and the timing of their arrival. There are many other places in the OT where the precision of God’s timing is shown and where indeed the miraculous element lies in the timing of the event.<\/p>\n<p>The locusts may have darkened the land with their numbers (Ex 10:15), but that was nothing compared with the three days of darkness that followed. Most commentators are agreed that this is the dreaded <em>khamsin,<\/em> the hot desert wind bringing dust storms or sandstorms that fill the sky and may last for days without respite. If the red earth from the Ethiopian highlands had been brought down by the floodwaters of the Nile and deposited widely over the land, some commentators have suggested that it was whipped into the air by this wind, thus giving an even darker pall over the land.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of the last plague, the death of the firstborn, we have no indication of what, if any, particular disease was used by God. Scripture gives us no clue. What can be said is that the Egyptians suffered but the Israelites did not. After this plague, they were free. Henceforth, it was their glad knowledge that none of “the plagues of Egypt” would strike them as God’s people (15:26). It was their unshakable belief that these plagues were God’s judgment, a punishment on stubborn Pharaoh, but the means of their salvation. Therefore, the plagues are not only a warning to us but also an encouragement. <em>See<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, Book of; Moses; Plague.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PLAGUES UPON EGYPT<\/h3>\n<p>Unprecedented series of disasters striking Egypt, probably culminating in spring or early summer (c. 1400 <span>BC<\/span>). They struck particularly the Nile Delta, although apparently not affecting the area called Goshen. These disasters were of such magnitude that the Egyptians from their earliest history could recall nothing like them (Ex 9:24).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Plagues<\/p>\n<p>• Pharaoh and the Plagues<\/p>\n<p>• The Nature of the Plagues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePlagues\">The Plagues<\/p>\n<p>The plagues are described in Exodus 7–11. At first sight one might imagine that the plagues took place in succession within a few weeks, but casual notes of time (see 7:25; 9:31-32), as well as the nature of some of the plagues, would suggest that several months may well have been involved. The first plague was the turning of water into blood (7:20), so that the fish died and the water stank. Next came a plague of frogs (8:6); even after their death, the land was strewn with piles of their bodies (v 14). Next came a plague of lice (v 17), or possibly gnats, sandflies, or mosquitoes. The exact sense of the word is not clear, but it obviously means some small irritating creature. After that came “swarms of flies” (v 24). Again, the meaning is not quite clear. Later Jewish tradition made it swarms of wild beasts, but flies is a much more likely sense. Then some sort of cattle plague struck (9:3), affecting the domestic animals. After that came boils on humans (v 9), boils that erupted into painful blisters and vesicles, apparently irritating rather than fatal. Hail followed (v 18), so severe that nothing like it had been seen before—hail associated with thunder and lightning (v 24). This was so heavy that it could be fatal (v 19), and naturally did great harm to the crops of Egypt (v 31). After that came locusts in vast numbers (10:13)—again on an unparalleled scale. Then came three days of complete darkness (v 22) that brought Egyptian life to a standstill. Finally, all the firstborn of the Egyptians died (12:29)—from Pharaoh’s household down to the lowliest homes in the land.<\/p>\n<p>All the plagues are seen in the Bible as successive judgments of God. Normally, each is preceded by a warning from Moses, which is disregarded by Pharaoh, and then each is lifted as a result of temporary repentance on the part of Pharaoh. But it is also clear that the plagues gradually increase in severity and intensity, until the climax comes in the death of the firstborn—with that, even Pharaoh is broken. The first plagues represent discomfort rather than danger for the Egyptians; then their animals and crops are struck down; finally death takes the firstborn, the flower of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>There are certain common features that run through the account of the plagues. At first, Pharaoh’s magicians try to belittle the plagues, and the signs that precede them, by producing similar effects themselves (7:11-12; 8:7). This is an interesting warning that miracles may be produced from various sources and that this sort of sign is therefore not important in itself. But the time comes when the magicians are beaten and can no longer compete (8:18); even they admit that this is God’s hand (v 19). When the plague of boils comes, the magicians cannot even present themselves before Pharaoh, so bad is their condition. After that, the magicians disappear from the story.<\/p>\n<p>Another motif that becomes increasingly clear as the account of the plagues continues, is the increasing emphasis on the way in which God’s people, living in Goshen, were delivered from the plagues that affected the Egyptians. It could be assumed anyway that, as Goshen was not on the Nile, the water that turned to blood and the plague of frogs and mosquitoes might affect them less. But in the case of the later swarms of flies (8:22), the cattle plague (9:4), the hail (v 26), and the darkness (10:23), we are specifically told that Israel was spared; in the case of the death of the firstborn, the Lord “passed over” Israelite homes.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems as if the hearts of all the Egyptians are just as hard as that of the pharaoh (7:13). Yet as the story goes on, his own people keep urging him to yield to God. The magicians admit God’s role in the plague of lice (8:19). Pharaoh’s servants who heeded God’s warning through Moses brought their servants and cattle indoors before the great hailstorms, and thus escaped loss and death (9:20). Only the unbelieving suffered. Finally, Pharaoh’s own servants exhorted him to let Israel go, bluntly telling him that the land was being ruined by his stubbornness (10:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PharaohandthePlagues\">Pharaoh and the Plagues<\/p>\n<p>Pharaoh’s reaction to God’s word is remarkable. Scripture describes the hardness of Pharoah’s heart in three ways. Exodus 7:3 speaks of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart; 7:14 has the neutral statement that Pharaoh’s heart was hardened; and 8:15 has Pharaoh hardening his own heart. Obviously, these all refer to the same process, which must be taken into account in any explanation. Furthermore, Paul must be allowed to have the last word on the matter (Rom 9:18).<\/p>\n<p>But, within this theological framework, there is quite a movement, not merely a succession of shallow repentances designed to secure the removal of the plague, and then a renewed stubbornness, calling down a fresh judgment. There is also a typically Asian bargaining session between Pharaoh and Moses. After Pharaoh’s broken promises to let the people go (8:8), he tries to bargain: the people should sacrifice to God in Egypt, without going at all (v 25); only the men should go (10:11); they should all go, but leave their flocks and herds as hostage (v 24). But there can be no bargaining of this sort in response to the call of God, as Pharaoh was to learn. After the death of the firstborn, he was glad to see the Israelites leave (12:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>In this sense, the whole story of the plagues is a struggle. It has sometimes been seen as the struggle of the prototype prophet, Moses (Dt 18:15), against the prototype king, Pharaoh; while it may be that, it is far more. It is the struggle of Moses, the servant of God, against the magicians. It is the struggle of Moses against mighty Pharaoh, or rather, the confrontation of Pharaoh by God, in the form of the word brought by his servant. At the deepest level, it is a victory won by God over the false gods of Egypt. This gives to many of the stories their peculiar relish. For the Nile is the god Hapi; Hept the frog is a god of fertility and childbirth; Ra the sun (outraged by the darkness) is a god; Hat-hot had the form of a heifer, and Apis that of a bull; the flying hornet symbolized Egypt; and Pharaoh himself was a god. Yet all were helpless before the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePlagues\">The Nature of the Plagues<\/p>\n<p>It is not known how God brought about the plagues, and some may think it vain even to ask, since God is free to use whatever means he pleases. Yet the statement that God turned back the waters of the “Reed Sea” by a strong east wind (Ex 14:21) indicates that God could use natural means to bring about his will. The Hebrew concept of “miracle” was not the same as the modern one, which usually regards miracles as “supernatural” and sees all else as “natural” and thus as nonmiraculous. The Hebrews, however, regarded everything in nature as the work of God; it was only that in certain instances he had acted more “wonderfully” (perhaps one would say more “obviously”) than others. Therefore, there is nothing in any way rationalistic in saying that on this occasion God may have sent a series of “natural” disasters (the sort of disasters to which Egypt was geographically prone) but so heightened them—and sent them in such rapid succession—that they constituted miracles.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the explanations of this sort assume a year of unusual climatic conditions, and in particular, a variation in the annual rise of the Nile. For instance, either an exceptionally low rise of the Nile (leading to red and muddy water) or an exceptionally high rise of the Nile (bringing down red earth from the Ethiopian highlands) have been suggested as explanations of the first plague. If one feels that the description “turned into blood” would be satisfied by thick blood-colored water, then either would be satisfactory. Another attractive suggestion is the multiplication of red plankton in the water. This phenomenon is fairly common across the world, especially in tropical and subtropical areas. This would make the likeness to blood much closer. In either of these cases, death of fish in foul water, and migration of frogs from the river would be understandable. If the Nile was flooding more widely than usual, the plague of frogs would be even more understandable. Some have seen the sudden death of the frogs as due to some type of internal anthrax; and, with piles of stinking frogs’ bodies in the fields, the way was laid wide open both for the carriers of the plagues (flies, etc.) and the plagues that followed.<\/p>\n<p>The next plague, for instance, was one of mosquitoes, sandflies, gnats, or possibly lice. At least the first and the last are potent carriers of disease, and all would cause irritant sores by their bites. The flooding of the stagnant waters of the Nile would give perfect breeding conditions for mosquitoes in particular.<\/p>\n<p>If we are right in assuming that the swarms that followed were swarms of flies, then everything would fit into a divine pattern. Piles of dead frogs, piles of rubbish strewn over the land by the flood (including, no doubt, raw sewage), foul and muddied Nile waters—this would be a prime breeding place for flies. Further, Jewish interpreters suggest that the flies in question were biting or stinging flies (like our gadflies or horseflies). Perhaps these were the agents of the disease of the cattle. Modern interpreters have suggested a particular type of fly, still known in the area, which multiplies very rapidly amid rotting vegetation. The flies and the dust (9:9) between them could have produced that dreaded tropical scourge “prickly heat,” easily becoming infected.<\/p>\n<p>Again, in the providence of God, if the Israelites were not in the Delta area, nor actually living along the Nile itself, but concentrated in the Wadi Tumilat to the east, they would be spared these plagues—a fact that did not escape Pharaoh’s notice (9:7). The miracle thus lay in God’s overruling providence, using his world and its geographic and climatic conditions to do his work of judgment on the stubborn-hearted.<\/p>\n<p>Hail, accompanied by violent thunderstorms (9:24), would be easily explicable (although rare in Egypt), especially in the “funnel” conditions of the Nile Valley, surrounded by hot, dry desert on either side. As to the severity of the hail (more common in Palestine), there are biblical parallels (Jos 10:11). With this plague there is a valuable note of time, given incidentally (Ex 9:31-32) in connection with the crops destroyed by the hail.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of the plague of locusts, God’s use of the elements of nature is made plain in the text, where an “east wind” brings them and a “sea wind” takes them away (10:13, 19). The “plague” here is both the enormous number of locusts (see Jl 1:1-12 for another illustration of this scourge) and the timing of their arrival. There are many other places in the OT where the precision of God’s timing is shown and where indeed the miraculous element lies in the timing of the event.<\/p>\n<p>The locusts may have darkened the land with their numbers (Ex 10:15), but that was nothing compared with the three days of darkness that followed. Most commentators are agreed that this is the dreaded <em>khamsin,<\/em> the hot desert wind bringing dust storms or sandstorms that fill the sky and may last for days without respite. If the red earth from the Ethiopian highlands had been brought down by the floodwaters of the Nile and deposited widely over the land, some commentators have suggested that it was whipped into the air by this wind, thus giving an even darker pall over the land.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of the last plague, the death of the firstborn, we have no indication of what, if any, particular disease was used by God. Scripture gives us no clue. What can be said is that the Egyptians suffered but the Israelites did not. After this plague, they were free. Henceforth, it was their glad knowledge that none of “the plagues of Egypt” would strike them as God’s people (15:26). It was their unshakable belief that these plagues were God’s judgment, a punishment on stubborn Pharaoh, but the means of their salvation. Therefore, the plagues are not only a warning to us but also an encouragement. <em>See<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, Book of; Moses; Plague.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PLAGUES UPON EGYPT Unprecedented series of disasters striking Egypt, probably culminating in spring or early summer (c. 1400 BC). They struck particularly the Nile Delta, although apparently not affecting the area called Goshen. These disasters were of such magnitude that the Egyptians from their earliest history could recall nothing like them (Ex 9:24). Preview • The Plagues • Pharaoh and the Plagues • The Nature of the Plagues The Plagues The plagues are described in Exodus 7–11. At first s...","summary_en":"PLAGUES UPON EGYPT Unprecedented series of disasters striking Egypt, probably culminating in spring or early summer (c. 1400 BC). They struck particularly the Nile Delta, although apparently not affecting the area called Goshen. These disasters were of such magnitude that the Egyptians from their earliest history could recall nothing like them (Ex 9:24). Preview • The Plagues • Pharaoh and the Plagues • The Nature of the Plagues The Plagues The plagues are described in Exodus 7–11. At first s...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40170,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible","title_en":"Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible","content_ro":"<h3>Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Several remarkable astronomical phenomena figure prominently in the Bible, including an apparent long day (Jos 10:12-14), the retrogression of the shadow on a sundial, which was a sign for King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11), and the star that led the magi to Bethlehem.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Several explanations of Joshua’s long day have been suggested. The opinion is held by some that the rotation of the earth actually ceased. There is no theological difficulty involved in this event, for the Creator may perform miracles within the sphere of the universe by temporarily altering or suspending natural laws. There is a scientific difficulty in the fact that such an interruption of gravitational force probably would have caused great dislocation of everything on the earth’s surface. God could have acted within the limitations of natural law to prevent such an upheaval, however.<\/p>\n<p>The long day may have been the result of other changes in the natural phenomena rather than the cessation of the earth’s rotation. Some have noted that the Hebrew word translated “stand still” may mean “to be quiet.” When applied to the sun, the word would imply a “quieting” of the sun’s activity, or a diminution of light. This would be an apt description of the eclipse of the sun. Such an occurrence would cause Israel’s enemies to flee in terror. Still others see the account as a highly poetic description of Joshua’s victory, not intended to be understood literally because it is a quotation from the book of Jashar. This book was probably a poetic work celebrating the exploits of Israel’s heroes.<\/p>\n<p>Examination of the account of the shadow’s movement on Ahaz’s sundial (as a sign to Hezekiah) shows that the event was purely local, since envoys came from Babylon to learn about it (2 Chr 32:31). It is possible that both the long day and retrogression of the shadow were local phenomena, perhaps caused by abnormal refraction of light. Atmospheric disturbances could have occurred at the time; the account of Joshua’s battle specifically mentions hailstones (Jos 10:11).<\/p>\n<p>The star of Bethlehem (Mt 2:1-11) has been identified with various astronomical phenomena such as the conjunction of Mars, Saturn, and Venus in 12 <span>BC<\/span>. In 2 <span>BC<\/span> Venus and Jupiter came into close proximity as well. That type of phenomenon does not seem to fit the description of the star, however. The star reportedly went before the magi and hovered over the site of the birth of the Christ child. Of course, the writer may have been using phenomenological language—that is, describing the event as it appeared to the observers. Some think the description points to a nova or supernova, a sudden increase in a star’s brightness; supernovas occur in a stellar system about once every 600 years. Although some natural event may serve to explain in whole or in part the star of Bethlehem, many Christians regard it as a miraculous supernatural phenomenon that God used to herald the event of the Incarnation.<\/p>\n<p>These unusual phenomena and others like them accompanied important events in the history of God’s dealing with humanity. Not only do they witness to the importance of those events in God’s redemptive plan, but they demonstrate God’s power as well.<\/p>\n<p>The attempts of some biblical scholars to explain these miracles in terms of natural phenomena is not an attempt to deny the validity of miracles. They only attempt to explain the phenomena within the sphere of observable natural order and the scope of biblical texts. Other scholars understand miracles to be the result of a supernatural alteration of physical laws, believing that the God who created the natural order continues to control that order and may perform miracles by altering the processes of nature to effect his will. In either case the power of God is central to the event, and the Bible faithfully records what took place.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Several remarkable astronomical phenomena figure prominently in the Bible, including an apparent long day (Jos 10:12-14), the retrogression of the shadow on a sundial, which was a sign for King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11), and the star that led the magi to Bethlehem.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Several explanations of Joshua’s long day have been suggested. The opinion is held by some that the rotation of the earth actually ceased. There is no theological difficulty involved in this event, for the Creator may perform miracles within the sphere of the universe by temporarily altering or suspending natural laws. There is a scientific difficulty in the fact that such an interruption of gravitational force probably would have caused great dislocation of everything on the earth’s surface. God could have acted within the limitations of natural law to prevent such an upheaval, however.<\/p>\n<p>The long day may have been the result of other changes in the natural phenomena rather than the cessation of the earth’s rotation. Some have noted that the Hebrew word translated “stand still” may mean “to be quiet.” When applied to the sun, the word would imply a “quieting” of the sun’s activity, or a diminution of light. This would be an apt description of the eclipse of the sun. Such an occurrence would cause Israel’s enemies to flee in terror. Still others see the account as a highly poetic description of Joshua’s victory, not intended to be understood literally because it is a quotation from the book of Jashar. This book was probably a poetic work celebrating the exploits of Israel’s heroes.<\/p>\n<p>Examination of the account of the shadow’s movement on Ahaz’s sundial (as a sign to Hezekiah) shows that the event was purely local, since envoys came from Babylon to learn about it (2 Chr 32:31). It is possible that both the long day and retrogression of the shadow were local phenomena, perhaps caused by abnormal refraction of light. Atmospheric disturbances could have occurred at the time; the account of Joshua’s battle specifically mentions hailstones (Jos 10:11).<\/p>\n<p>The star of Bethlehem (Mt 2:1-11) has been identified with various astronomical phenomena such as the conjunction of Mars, Saturn, and Venus in 12 <span>BC<\/span>. In 2 <span>BC<\/span> Venus and Jupiter came into close proximity as well. That type of phenomenon does not seem to fit the description of the star, however. The star reportedly went before the magi and hovered over the site of the birth of the Christ child. Of course, the writer may have been using phenomenological language—that is, describing the event as it appeared to the observers. Some think the description points to a nova or supernova, a sudden increase in a star’s brightness; supernovas occur in a stellar system about once every 600 years. Although some natural event may serve to explain in whole or in part the star of Bethlehem, many Christians regard it as a miraculous supernatural phenomenon that God used to herald the event of the Incarnation.<\/p>\n<p>These unusual phenomena and others like them accompanied important events in the history of God’s dealing with humanity. Not only do they witness to the importance of those events in God’s redemptive plan, but they demonstrate God’s power as well.<\/p>\n<p>The attempts of some biblical scholars to explain these miracles in terms of natural phenomena is not an attempt to deny the validity of miracles. They only attempt to explain the phenomena within the sphere of observable natural order and the scope of biblical texts. Other scholars understand miracles to be the result of a supernatural alteration of physical laws, believing that the God who created the natural order continues to control that order and may perform miracles by altering the processes of nature to effect his will. In either case the power of God is central to the event, and the Bible faithfully records what took place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible Several remarkable astronomical phenomena figure prominently in the Bible, including an apparent long day (Jos 10:12-14), the retrogression of the shadow on a sundial, which was a sign for King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11), and the star that led the magi to Bethlehem. Several explanations of Joshua’s long day have been suggested. The opinion is held by some that the rotation of the earth actually ceased. There is no theological difficulty involved in th...","summary_en":"Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible Several remarkable astronomical phenomena figure prominently in the Bible, including an apparent long day (Jos 10:12-14), the retrogression of the shadow on a sundial, which was a sign for King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11), and the star that led the magi to Bethlehem. Several explanations of Joshua’s long day have been suggested. The opinion is held by some that the rotation of the earth actually ceased. There is no theological difficulty involved in th...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":1003,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Aijalon","title_en":"Aijalon","content_ro":"<h3>AIJALON<\/h3>\n<li>1. City located in a valley 15 miles (24 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem (at modern Yalo) and originally allotted to Dan’s tribe (Jos 19:42). Aijalon was designated as one of four levitical cities in Dan’s area (Jos 21:24) and was later made a city of refuge by Ephraim’s tribe (1 Chr 6:69). Dan’s tribe had by then migrated north, having been unable to occupy its southerly allotment, including Aijalon (Jgs 1:34-36). Near Aijalon, Saul and Jonathan won a victory over the Philistines (1 Sm 14:31). Members of Benjamin’s tribe occupied it at one time (1 Chr 8:13).<\/li>\n<p>When the kingdom was divided after Solomon’s death, Aijalon, on the northwest border of the southern kingdom, was fortified by King Rehoboam (2 Chr 11:10). It was one of 65 cities claimed to have been conquered by the Egyptian pharaoh Shishak, who invaded Palestine around 924 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Chr 12:2-12). Much later, Aijalon was lost to the Philistines during the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 28:18).<\/p>\n<p>The valley of Aijalon was part of the geographical setting of Joshua’s battle to control Gibeon (Jos 10:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). To make the Israelite victory complete, God answered Joshua’s prayer to “let the sun stand still over Gibeon, and the moon over the valley of Aijalon” (Jos 10:12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Levitical Cities.<\/p>\n<li>2. City in the territory of Zebulun, burial place of the judge Elon (Jgs 12:12).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>AIJALON<\/h3>\n<li>1. City located in a valley 15 miles (24 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem (at modern Yalo) and originally allotted to Dan’s tribe (Jos 19:42). Aijalon was designated as one of four levitical cities in Dan’s area (Jos 21:24) and was later made a city of refuge by Ephraim’s tribe (1 Chr 6:69). Dan’s tribe had by then migrated north, having been unable to occupy its southerly allotment, including Aijalon (Jgs 1:34-36). Near Aijalon, Saul and Jonathan won a victory over the Philistines (1 Sm 14:31). Members of Benjamin’s tribe occupied it at one time (1 Chr 8:13).<\/li>\n<p>When the kingdom was divided after Solomon’s death, Aijalon, on the northwest border of the southern kingdom, was fortified by King Rehoboam (2 Chr 11:10). It was one of 65 cities claimed to have been conquered by the Egyptian pharaoh Shishak, who invaded Palestine around 924 <span>BC<\/span> (2 Chr 12:2-12). Much later, Aijalon was lost to the Philistines during the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 28:18).<\/p>\n<p>The valley of Aijalon was part of the geographical setting of Joshua’s battle to control Gibeon (Jos 10:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). To make the Israelite victory complete, God answered Joshua’s prayer to “let the sun stand still over Gibeon, and the moon over the valley of Aijalon” (Jos 10:12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Levitical Cities.<\/p>\n<li>2. City in the territory of Zebulun, burial place of the judge Elon (Jgs 12:12).<\/li>","summary_ro":"AIJALON 1. City located in a valley 15 miles (24 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem (at modern Yalo) and originally allotted to Dan’s tribe (Jos 19:42). Aijalon was designated as one of four levitical cities in Dan’s area (Jos 21:24) and was later made a city of refuge by Ephraim’s tribe (1 Chr 6:69). Dan’s tribe had by then migrated north, having been unable to occupy its southerly allotment, including Aijalon (Jgs 1:34-36). Near Aijalon, Saul and Jonathan won a victory over the Philistines ...","summary_en":"AIJALON 1. City located in a valley 15 miles (24 kilometers) northwest of Jerusalem (at modern Yalo) and originally allotted to Dan’s tribe (Jos 19:42). Aijalon was designated as one of four levitical cities in Dan’s area (Jos 21:24) and was later made a city of refuge by Ephraim’s tribe (1 Chr 6:69). Dan’s tribe had by then migrated north, having been unable to occupy its southerly allotment, including Aijalon (Jgs 1:34-36). Near Aijalon, Saul and Jonathan won a victory over the Philistines ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1012,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ajalon*","title_en":"Ajalon*","content_ro":"<h3>AJALON*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV rendering of Aijalon in Joshua 10:12; 19:42; and 2 Chronicles 28:18. <em>See<\/em> Aijalon #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AJALON*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV rendering of Aijalon in Joshua 10:12; 19:42; and 2 Chronicles 28:18. <em>See<\/em> Aijalon #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AJALON* KJV rendering of Aijalon in Joshua 10:12; 19:42; and 2 Chronicles 28:18. See Aijalon #1.","summary_en":"AJALON* KJV rendering of Aijalon in Joshua 10:12; 19:42; and 2 Chronicles 28:18. See Aijalon #1.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18537,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Jashar","title_en":"Book of Jashar","content_ro":"<h3>JASHAR, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>This was an ancient Hebrew writing that is no longer extant. It was probably a national songbook containing songs praising the exploits of Hebrew heroes. It is mentioned in the OT account of Joshua’s command to the sun and moon to stand still during the battle with the five kings (Jos 10:13) and in the account of David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sm 1:17-27). It is also possible that Solomon’s words of dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 8:12-13) were included. According to the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT), the writer of that passage uses the same language as in Joshua 10:12-13 and asks rhetorically if Solomon’s statement were written in the book of “Song.” Some scholars believe that this question may have accidentally dropped out of the Hebrew text since the whole quotation appears in the Septuagint following Solomon’s prayer of 1 Kings 8:14-53. It is also likely that some Hebrew letters may have been transposed so that the Septuagint reads “Song” instead of “Jashar.” If one accepts these assumptions, then 1 Kings 8:12-13 would have been part of the Book of Jashar.<\/p>\n<p>It is also possible that the Septuagint rendering, “Book of Song,” is the more correct title. All of the quotations are poetry; the term “Jashar” has never been explained satisfactorily; and “Jashar” has similarities to various Hebrew root forms meaning “to sing.” Hence, some scholars believe that “Book of Song” is a more correct title.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of the book cannot be determined with certainty except to say that it probably contained a wide variety of songs. This is evident as one considers the types of materials contained in the three passages mentioned above. One is an appeal for the prolonging of daylight in order for Israel to complete a military victory; one is an example of David’s literary skill and an expression of the national importance and close friendship of the persons involved; and one is an exclamation extolling God’s supremacy over ritual and nature.<\/p>\n<p>The origin of the Book of Jashar is more clouded in obscurity than is its content. Some believe that it was a written collection of songs dating to the days before the monarchy. Some think that it was an oral tradition dating approximately from the time of Solomon. Others suggest that it was a vital instrument in the establishment of literary archives during the monarchy to preserve the notable events of Israelites. This has led to the suggestion that the Song of Miriam (Ex 15:21) and the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5) may have been part of the collection.<\/p>\n<p>The book has long interested many people, and this interest has led to various false imitations, false identifications, and false reproductions of it.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JASHAR, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>This was an ancient Hebrew writing that is no longer extant. It was probably a national songbook containing songs praising the exploits of Hebrew heroes. It is mentioned in the OT account of Joshua’s command to the sun and moon to stand still during the battle with the five kings (Jos 10:13) and in the account of David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sm 1:17-27). It is also possible that Solomon’s words of dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 8:12-13) were included. According to the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT), the writer of that passage uses the same language as in Joshua 10:12-13 and asks rhetorically if Solomon’s statement were written in the book of “Song.” Some scholars believe that this question may have accidentally dropped out of the Hebrew text since the whole quotation appears in the Septuagint following Solomon’s prayer of 1 Kings 8:14-53. It is also likely that some Hebrew letters may have been transposed so that the Septuagint reads “Song” instead of “Jashar.” If one accepts these assumptions, then 1 Kings 8:12-13 would have been part of the Book of Jashar.<\/p>\n<p>It is also possible that the Septuagint rendering, “Book of Song,” is the more correct title. All of the quotations are poetry; the term “Jashar” has never been explained satisfactorily; and “Jashar” has similarities to various Hebrew root forms meaning “to sing.” Hence, some scholars believe that “Book of Song” is a more correct title.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of the book cannot be determined with certainty except to say that it probably contained a wide variety of songs. This is evident as one considers the types of materials contained in the three passages mentioned above. One is an appeal for the prolonging of daylight in order for Israel to complete a military victory; one is an example of David’s literary skill and an expression of the national importance and close friendship of the persons involved; and one is an exclamation extolling God’s supremacy over ritual and nature.<\/p>\n<p>The origin of the Book of Jashar is more clouded in obscurity than is its content. Some believe that it was a written collection of songs dating to the days before the monarchy. Some think that it was an oral tradition dating approximately from the time of Solomon. Others suggest that it was a vital instrument in the establishment of literary archives during the monarchy to preserve the notable events of Israelites. This has led to the suggestion that the Song of Miriam (Ex 15:21) and the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5) may have been part of the collection.<\/p>\n<p>The book has long interested many people, and this interest has led to various false imitations, false identifications, and false reproductions of it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JASHAR, Book of This was an ancient Hebrew writing that is no longer extant. It was probably a national songbook containing songs praising the exploits of Hebrew heroes. It is mentioned in the OT account of Joshua’s command to the sun and moon to stand still during the battle with the five kings (Jos 10:13) and in the account of David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sm 1:17-27). It is also possible that Solomon’s words of dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 8:12-13) were included. According to...","summary_en":"JASHAR, Book of This was an ancient Hebrew writing that is no longer extant. It was probably a national songbook containing songs praising the exploits of Hebrew heroes. It is mentioned in the OT account of Joshua’s command to the sun and moon to stand still during the battle with the five kings (Jos 10:13) and in the account of David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sm 1:17-27). It is also possible that Solomon’s words of dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 8:12-13) were included. According to...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20632,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joshua (Person)","title_en":"Joshua (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, <span>kjv<\/span> “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17).<\/li>\n<p>Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is My Banner” (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land of Canaan, Joshua represented the tribe of Ephraim (Nm 13:8). At that time Joshua was called Hoshea, but Moses changed his name to Joshua (vv 8, 16). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies to bring back an affirmative report concerning an Israelite invasion of the land (14:6-9). Consequently, of all the adult Israelite males to leave Egypt in the exodus, only these two crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord announced to Moses his impending death, Moses asked about his successor, and the Lord appointed Joshua to that position (Nm 27:12-23). After the death of Moses on Mt Nebo, Joshua’s leadership was confirmed (34:17), and the Lord told Joshua to go over the Jordan and take the land (Jos 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>From the Transjordan, Joshua sent two men across the river to reconnoiter Jericho (ch 2). In Jericho they were concealed by Rahab and later safely made their way back to Joshua to report that the people of the land were fainthearted because of the Israelites (vv 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>When Israel had crossed the river, the Lord instructed Joshua to set up a circle of 12 stones at Gilgal to commemorate this passage (Jos 4:1-7). The Lord then commanded all of the males who had been born during the exodus to be circumcised (5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>While camped at Gilgal, near Jericho, Joshua was confronted by a man with a drawn sword. When Joshua challenged the man, he learned that it was the Lord, who told him to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy (Jos 5:13-15). The Lord gave Joshua directions for the destruction of Jericho; these were followed explicitly and the city fell (ch 6). The attack on Ai ended in temporary defeat, until the matter of Achan’s sin was discovered and judged (7:10-26). Then Ai was taken and destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-32), and the blessings and curses were read, as commanded by God through Moses (Jos 8:33-35; cf. Dt 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Because the Israelites failed to ask direction from the Lord (Jos 9:14), Joshua was tricked into making a covenant of peace with the Hivites of Gibeon. Joshua then reduced them to doing menial tasks in Israel (vv 21-27).<\/p>\n<p>The kings of the various Canaanite cities allied themselves against the Israelite threat (Jos 9:1-2) and a league of five Amorite cities (Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon) attacked Gibeon (10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua for help; he responded quickly against this Amorite confederation and routed the Amorite forces. It was on this occasion that Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand still so that Israel could have more time to defeat these adversaries (vv 12-14). This victory was followed by a series of successful attacks on enemy towns (vv 28-43).<\/p>\n<p>A northern alliance headed by Jabin, king of Hazor, was the next opposition (Jos 11:1-5). The Lord assured Joshua of success, and the city of Hazor was taken and destroyed by fire (vv 6-15). Joshua 11:23 summarizes the conquest of the land, and chapter 12 enumerates the kings who were conquered.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was now old, and the Lord told him that much land remained to be possessed. These territories are listed, but the Lord directed Joshua to proceed with the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes (Jos 13:7; cf. 13:8–18:28). Joshua himself was given the city he asked for, Timnath-serah, in the hill country of Ephraim, which he rebuilt and settled (19:49-50).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord told Joshua to appoint cities of refuge to which a person guilty of manslaughter could flee to escape the avenger of blood (Jos 20). Then the Levites came to Eleazar the priest and Joshua to request that they be given their cities, as the Lord had commanded through Moses (21:1-42).<\/p>\n\n<p>In his advanced years Joshua summoned all Israel and solemnly charged them to continue in faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 23). Finally, he called all Israel to Shechem, where he gave them his farewell message. He summed up the Lord’s dealings with them from the time of Abraham and again challenged them to serve the Lord, putting before them the well-known choice and decision: “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died at the age of 110 years and was buried in the land of his inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:29-30; the parallel account in Jgs 2:8-9 reads “Timnath-heres,” <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Israel served the Lord during all the days of Joshua and the elders who outlived him (Jos 24:31; Jgs 2:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Inhabitant of Beth-shemesh. It was his grainfield into which the cart carrying the ark sent by the Philistines came. It stopped by a large stone which was then used to commemorate this event (1 Sm 6:14, 18).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Jerusalem during King Josiah’s reign (2 Kgs 23:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Jozadak’s son and high priest during the days of Zerubbabel in postexilic Jerusalem (Hg 1:1-14; 2:2-4; Zec 3:1-9; 6:11; <span>nlt<\/span> “Jeshua”). Joshua is alternately called Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. <em>See<\/em> Jeshua (Person) #3.<\/li>\n<li>5. Eliezer’s son and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, <span>kjv<\/span> “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17).<\/li>\n<p>Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is My Banner” (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land of Canaan, Joshua represented the tribe of Ephraim (Nm 13:8). At that time Joshua was called Hoshea, but Moses changed his name to Joshua (vv 8, 16). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies to bring back an affirmative report concerning an Israelite invasion of the land (14:6-9). Consequently, of all the adult Israelite males to leave Egypt in the exodus, only these two crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord announced to Moses his impending death, Moses asked about his successor, and the Lord appointed Joshua to that position (Nm 27:12-23). After the death of Moses on Mt Nebo, Joshua’s leadership was confirmed (34:17), and the Lord told Joshua to go over the Jordan and take the land (Jos 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>From the Transjordan, Joshua sent two men across the river to reconnoiter Jericho (ch 2). In Jericho they were concealed by Rahab and later safely made their way back to Joshua to report that the people of the land were fainthearted because of the Israelites (vv 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>When Israel had crossed the river, the Lord instructed Joshua to set up a circle of 12 stones at Gilgal to commemorate this passage (Jos 4:1-7). The Lord then commanded all of the males who had been born during the exodus to be circumcised (5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>While camped at Gilgal, near Jericho, Joshua was confronted by a man with a drawn sword. When Joshua challenged the man, he learned that it was the Lord, who told him to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy (Jos 5:13-15). The Lord gave Joshua directions for the destruction of Jericho; these were followed explicitly and the city fell (ch 6). The attack on Ai ended in temporary defeat, until the matter of Achan’s sin was discovered and judged (7:10-26). Then Ai was taken and destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-32), and the blessings and curses were read, as commanded by God through Moses (Jos 8:33-35; cf. Dt 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Because the Israelites failed to ask direction from the Lord (Jos 9:14), Joshua was tricked into making a covenant of peace with the Hivites of Gibeon. Joshua then reduced them to doing menial tasks in Israel (vv 21-27).<\/p>\n<p>The kings of the various Canaanite cities allied themselves against the Israelite threat (Jos 9:1-2) and a league of five Amorite cities (Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon) attacked Gibeon (10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua for help; he responded quickly against this Amorite confederation and routed the Amorite forces. It was on this occasion that Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand still so that Israel could have more time to defeat these adversaries (vv 12-14). This victory was followed by a series of successful attacks on enemy towns (vv 28-43).<\/p>\n<p>A northern alliance headed by Jabin, king of Hazor, was the next opposition (Jos 11:1-5). The Lord assured Joshua of success, and the city of Hazor was taken and destroyed by fire (vv 6-15). Joshua 11:23 summarizes the conquest of the land, and chapter 12 enumerates the kings who were conquered.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was now old, and the Lord told him that much land remained to be possessed. These territories are listed, but the Lord directed Joshua to proceed with the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes (Jos 13:7; cf. 13:8–18:28). Joshua himself was given the city he asked for, Timnath-serah, in the hill country of Ephraim, which he rebuilt and settled (19:49-50).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord told Joshua to appoint cities of refuge to which a person guilty of manslaughter could flee to escape the avenger of blood (Jos 20). Then the Levites came to Eleazar the priest and Joshua to request that they be given their cities, as the Lord had commanded through Moses (21:1-42).<\/p>\n\n<p>In his advanced years Joshua summoned all Israel and solemnly charged them to continue in faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 23). Finally, he called all Israel to Shechem, where he gave them his farewell message. He summed up the Lord’s dealings with them from the time of Abraham and again challenged them to serve the Lord, putting before them the well-known choice and decision: “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died at the age of 110 years and was buried in the land of his inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:29-30; the parallel account in Jgs 2:8-9 reads “Timnath-heres,” <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Israel served the Lord during all the days of Joshua and the elders who outlived him (Jos 24:31; Jgs 2:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Inhabitant of Beth-shemesh. It was his grainfield into which the cart carrying the ark sent by the Philistines came. It stopped by a large stone which was then used to commemorate this event (1 Sm 6:14, 18).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Jerusalem during King Josiah’s reign (2 Kgs 23:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Jozadak’s son and high priest during the days of Zerubbabel in postexilic Jerusalem (Hg 1:1-14; 2:2-4; Zec 3:1-9; 6:11; <span>nlt<\/span> “Jeshua”). Joshua is alternately called Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. <em>See<\/em> Jeshua (Person) #3.<\/li>\n<li>5. Eliezer’s son and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA (Person) 1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, kjv “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17). Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The Lord Is My Banner” (v 15). When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA (Person) 1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, kjv “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17). Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The Lord Is My Banner” (v 15). When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20780,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40167,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible","title_en":"Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible","content_ro":"<h3>Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Several remarkable astronomical phenomena figure prominently in the Bible, including an apparent long day (Jos 10:12-14), the retrogression of the shadow on a sundial, which was a sign for King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11), and the star that led the magi to Bethlehem.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Several explanations of Joshua’s long day have been suggested. The opinion is held by some that the rotation of the earth actually ceased. There is no theological difficulty involved in this event, for the Creator may perform miracles within the sphere of the universe by temporarily altering or suspending natural laws. There is a scientific difficulty in the fact that such an interruption of gravitational force probably would have caused great dislocation of everything on the earth’s surface. God could have acted within the limitations of natural law to prevent such an upheaval, however.<\/p>\n<p>The long day may have been the result of other changes in the natural phenomena rather than the cessation of the earth’s rotation. Some have noted that the Hebrew word translated “stand still” may mean “to be quiet.” When applied to the sun, the word would imply a “quieting” of the sun’s activity, or a diminution of light. This would be an apt description of the eclipse of the sun. Such an occurrence would cause Israel’s enemies to flee in terror. Still others see the account as a highly poetic description of Joshua’s victory, not intended to be understood literally because it is a quotation from the book of Jashar. This book was probably a poetic work celebrating the exploits of Israel’s heroes.<\/p>\n<p>Examination of the account of the shadow’s movement on Ahaz’s sundial (as a sign to Hezekiah) shows that the event was purely local, since envoys came from Babylon to learn about it (2 Chr 32:31). It is possible that both the long day and retrogression of the shadow were local phenomena, perhaps caused by abnormal refraction of light. Atmospheric disturbances could have occurred at the time; the account of Joshua’s battle specifically mentions hailstones (Jos 10:11).<\/p>\n<p>The star of Bethlehem (Mt 2:1-11) has been identified with various astronomical phenomena such as the conjunction of Mars, Saturn, and Venus in 12 <span>BC<\/span>. In 2 <span>BC<\/span> Venus and Jupiter came into close proximity as well. That type of phenomenon does not seem to fit the description of the star, however. The star reportedly went before the magi and hovered over the site of the birth of the Christ child. Of course, the writer may have been using phenomenological language—that is, describing the event as it appeared to the observers. Some think the description points to a nova or supernova, a sudden increase in a star’s brightness; supernovas occur in a stellar system about once every 600 years. Although some natural event may serve to explain in whole or in part the star of Bethlehem, many Christians regard it as a miraculous supernatural phenomenon that God used to herald the event of the Incarnation.<\/p>\n<p>These unusual phenomena and others like them accompanied important events in the history of God’s dealing with humanity. Not only do they witness to the importance of those events in God’s redemptive plan, but they demonstrate God’s power as well.<\/p>\n<p>The attempts of some biblical scholars to explain these miracles in terms of natural phenomena is not an attempt to deny the validity of miracles. They only attempt to explain the phenomena within the sphere of observable natural order and the scope of biblical texts. Other scholars understand miracles to be the result of a supernatural alteration of physical laws, believing that the God who created the natural order continues to control that order and may perform miracles by altering the processes of nature to effect his will. In either case the power of God is central to the event, and the Bible faithfully records what took place.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Several remarkable astronomical phenomena figure prominently in the Bible, including an apparent long day (Jos 10:12-14), the retrogression of the shadow on a sundial, which was a sign for King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11), and the star that led the magi to Bethlehem.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Several explanations of Joshua’s long day have been suggested. The opinion is held by some that the rotation of the earth actually ceased. There is no theological difficulty involved in this event, for the Creator may perform miracles within the sphere of the universe by temporarily altering or suspending natural laws. There is a scientific difficulty in the fact that such an interruption of gravitational force probably would have caused great dislocation of everything on the earth’s surface. God could have acted within the limitations of natural law to prevent such an upheaval, however.<\/p>\n<p>The long day may have been the result of other changes in the natural phenomena rather than the cessation of the earth’s rotation. Some have noted that the Hebrew word translated “stand still” may mean “to be quiet.” When applied to the sun, the word would imply a “quieting” of the sun’s activity, or a diminution of light. This would be an apt description of the eclipse of the sun. Such an occurrence would cause Israel’s enemies to flee in terror. Still others see the account as a highly poetic description of Joshua’s victory, not intended to be understood literally because it is a quotation from the book of Jashar. This book was probably a poetic work celebrating the exploits of Israel’s heroes.<\/p>\n<p>Examination of the account of the shadow’s movement on Ahaz’s sundial (as a sign to Hezekiah) shows that the event was purely local, since envoys came from Babylon to learn about it (2 Chr 32:31). It is possible that both the long day and retrogression of the shadow were local phenomena, perhaps caused by abnormal refraction of light. Atmospheric disturbances could have occurred at the time; the account of Joshua’s battle specifically mentions hailstones (Jos 10:11).<\/p>\n<p>The star of Bethlehem (Mt 2:1-11) has been identified with various astronomical phenomena such as the conjunction of Mars, Saturn, and Venus in 12 <span>BC<\/span>. In 2 <span>BC<\/span> Venus and Jupiter came into close proximity as well. That type of phenomenon does not seem to fit the description of the star, however. The star reportedly went before the magi and hovered over the site of the birth of the Christ child. Of course, the writer may have been using phenomenological language—that is, describing the event as it appeared to the observers. Some think the description points to a nova or supernova, a sudden increase in a star’s brightness; supernovas occur in a stellar system about once every 600 years. Although some natural event may serve to explain in whole or in part the star of Bethlehem, many Christians regard it as a miraculous supernatural phenomenon that God used to herald the event of the Incarnation.<\/p>\n<p>These unusual phenomena and others like them accompanied important events in the history of God’s dealing with humanity. Not only do they witness to the importance of those events in God’s redemptive plan, but they demonstrate God’s power as well.<\/p>\n<p>The attempts of some biblical scholars to explain these miracles in terms of natural phenomena is not an attempt to deny the validity of miracles. They only attempt to explain the phenomena within the sphere of observable natural order and the scope of biblical texts. Other scholars understand miracles to be the result of a supernatural alteration of physical laws, believing that the God who created the natural order continues to control that order and may perform miracles by altering the processes of nature to effect his will. In either case the power of God is central to the event, and the Bible faithfully records what took place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible Several remarkable astronomical phenomena figure prominently in the Bible, including an apparent long day (Jos 10:12-14), the retrogression of the shadow on a sundial, which was a sign for King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11), and the star that led the magi to Bethlehem. Several explanations of Joshua’s long day have been suggested. The opinion is held by some that the rotation of the earth actually ceased. There is no theological difficulty involved in th...","summary_en":"Remarkable Astronomical Events in the Bible Several remarkable astronomical phenomena figure prominently in the Bible, including an apparent long day (Jos 10:12-14), the retrogression of the shadow on a sundial, which was a sign for King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11), and the star that led the magi to Bethlehem. Several explanations of Joshua’s long day have been suggested. The opinion is held by some that the rotation of the earth actually ceased. There is no theological difficulty involved in th...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45460,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:12","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> <em>Joshua prayed<\/em> to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The <em>sun<\/em> and <em>moon,<\/em> two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • <em>Aijalon<\/em> was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> <em>Joshua prayed<\/em> to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The <em>sun<\/em> and <em>moon,<\/em> two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • <em>Aijalon<\/em> was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:12 Joshua prayed to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The sun and moon, two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • Aijalon was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.","summary_en":"10:12 Joshua prayed to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The sun and moon, two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • Aijalon was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73086,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:12","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> <em>Joshua prayed<\/em> to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The <em>sun<\/em> and <em>moon,<\/em> two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • <em>Aijalon<\/em> was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> <em>Joshua prayed<\/em> to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The <em>sun<\/em> and <em>moon,<\/em> two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • <em>Aijalon<\/em> was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:12 Joshua prayed to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The sun and moon, two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • Aijalon was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.","summary_en":"10:12 Joshua prayed to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The sun and moon, two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • Aijalon was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100712,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:12","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> <em>Joshua prayed<\/em> to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The <em>sun<\/em> and <em>moon,<\/em> two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • <em>Aijalon<\/em> was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> <em>Joshua prayed<\/em> to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The <em>sun<\/em> and <em>moon,<\/em> two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • <em>Aijalon<\/em> was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:12 Joshua prayed to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The sun and moon, two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • Aijalon was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.","summary_en":"10:12 Joshua prayed to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The sun and moon, two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • Aijalon was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128338,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:12","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> <em>Joshua prayed<\/em> to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The <em>sun<\/em> and <em>moon,<\/em> two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • <em>Aijalon<\/em> was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:12<\/strong> <em>Joshua prayed<\/em> to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The <em>sun<\/em> and <em>moon,<\/em> two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • <em>Aijalon<\/em> was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:12 Joshua prayed to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The sun and moon, two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • Aijalon was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.","summary_en":"10:12 Joshua prayed to have the day lengthened so the Israelites could finish the task without allowing the Amorite forces time to organize a new defense against Israel. • The sun and moon, two of Canaan’s most powerful gods, proved powerless against the Lord. • Aijalon was a city near the western end of the Beth-horon road.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":5508,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book","title_en":"Book","content_ro":"<h3>BOOK<\/h3>\n<p>A set of written sheets or a scroll—whether composed of wood, parchment, papyrus, or paper—containing records or a literary composition. With respect to the Bible, each individual composition is called a “book” because that was what the document was before it became part of the biblical collection. As such, the Bible has 66 books—such as Genesis, Isaiah, Matthew, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The most important book to the ancient Hebrews was the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8), because it came from God to Moses (Jos 23:6; Mk 12:26) and contained the record of the Mosaic covenant (e.g., Ex 20). God instructed Joshua to meditate on it day and night (Jos 1:8). The prophets appealed to it constantly, particularly to Deuteronomy. The discovery of the Book of the Law during the renovation of the temple in Josiah’s reign led to important religious reforms (2 Kgs 22:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Some books specifically labeled as biblical source materials are the Book of the Wars of the Lord (Nm 21:14), the Book of Jashar (Jos 10:13; 2 Sm 1:18), the Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kgs 11:41), and the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah (14:29). A number of prophetic works are cited in the books of Chronicles as sources for the material recorded in those books. Some of these are the Chronicles of Samuel the Seer, the Chronicles of Nathan the Prophet, the Chronicles of Gad the Seer (1 Chr 29:29), and the Prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite (2 Chr 9:29). The fact that prophetic sources were used for Chronicles demonstrates that the Hebrew people regarded their history as the record of God’s activity. <em>See<\/em> Writing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BOOK<\/h3>\n<p>A set of written sheets or a scroll—whether composed of wood, parchment, papyrus, or paper—containing records or a literary composition. With respect to the Bible, each individual composition is called a “book” because that was what the document was before it became part of the biblical collection. As such, the Bible has 66 books—such as Genesis, Isaiah, Matthew, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The most important book to the ancient Hebrews was the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8), because it came from God to Moses (Jos 23:6; Mk 12:26) and contained the record of the Mosaic covenant (e.g., Ex 20). God instructed Joshua to meditate on it day and night (Jos 1:8). The prophets appealed to it constantly, particularly to Deuteronomy. The discovery of the Book of the Law during the renovation of the temple in Josiah’s reign led to important religious reforms (2 Kgs 22:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Some books specifically labeled as biblical source materials are the Book of the Wars of the Lord (Nm 21:14), the Book of Jashar (Jos 10:13; 2 Sm 1:18), the Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kgs 11:41), and the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah (14:29). A number of prophetic works are cited in the books of Chronicles as sources for the material recorded in those books. Some of these are the Chronicles of Samuel the Seer, the Chronicles of Nathan the Prophet, the Chronicles of Gad the Seer (1 Chr 29:29), and the Prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite (2 Chr 9:29). The fact that prophetic sources were used for Chronicles demonstrates that the Hebrew people regarded their history as the record of God’s activity. <em>See<\/em> Writing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BOOK A set of written sheets or a scroll—whether composed of wood, parchment, papyrus, or paper—containing records or a literary composition. With respect to the Bible, each individual composition is called a “book” because that was what the document was before it became part of the biblical collection. As such, the Bible has 66 books—such as Genesis, Isaiah, Matthew, and Revelation. The most important book to the ancient Hebrews was the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8), because it came from God ...","summary_en":"BOOK A set of written sheets or a scroll—whether composed of wood, parchment, papyrus, or paper—containing records or a literary composition. With respect to the Bible, each individual composition is called a “book” because that was what the document was before it became part of the biblical collection. As such, the Bible has 66 books—such as Genesis, Isaiah, Matthew, and Revelation. The most important book to the ancient Hebrews was the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8), because it came from God ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18534,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Jashar","title_en":"Book of Jashar","content_ro":"<h3>JASHAR, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>This was an ancient Hebrew writing that is no longer extant. It was probably a national songbook containing songs praising the exploits of Hebrew heroes. It is mentioned in the OT account of Joshua’s command to the sun and moon to stand still during the battle with the five kings (Jos 10:13) and in the account of David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sm 1:17-27). It is also possible that Solomon’s words of dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 8:12-13) were included. According to the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT), the writer of that passage uses the same language as in Joshua 10:12-13 and asks rhetorically if Solomon’s statement were written in the book of “Song.” Some scholars believe that this question may have accidentally dropped out of the Hebrew text since the whole quotation appears in the Septuagint following Solomon’s prayer of 1 Kings 8:14-53. It is also likely that some Hebrew letters may have been transposed so that the Septuagint reads “Song” instead of “Jashar.” If one accepts these assumptions, then 1 Kings 8:12-13 would have been part of the Book of Jashar.<\/p>\n<p>It is also possible that the Septuagint rendering, “Book of Song,” is the more correct title. All of the quotations are poetry; the term “Jashar” has never been explained satisfactorily; and “Jashar” has similarities to various Hebrew root forms meaning “to sing.” Hence, some scholars believe that “Book of Song” is a more correct title.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of the book cannot be determined with certainty except to say that it probably contained a wide variety of songs. This is evident as one considers the types of materials contained in the three passages mentioned above. One is an appeal for the prolonging of daylight in order for Israel to complete a military victory; one is an example of David’s literary skill and an expression of the national importance and close friendship of the persons involved; and one is an exclamation extolling God’s supremacy over ritual and nature.<\/p>\n<p>The origin of the Book of Jashar is more clouded in obscurity than is its content. Some believe that it was a written collection of songs dating to the days before the monarchy. Some think that it was an oral tradition dating approximately from the time of Solomon. Others suggest that it was a vital instrument in the establishment of literary archives during the monarchy to preserve the notable events of Israelites. This has led to the suggestion that the Song of Miriam (Ex 15:21) and the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5) may have been part of the collection.<\/p>\n<p>The book has long interested many people, and this interest has led to various false imitations, false identifications, and false reproductions of it.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JASHAR, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>This was an ancient Hebrew writing that is no longer extant. It was probably a national songbook containing songs praising the exploits of Hebrew heroes. It is mentioned in the OT account of Joshua’s command to the sun and moon to stand still during the battle with the five kings (Jos 10:13) and in the account of David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sm 1:17-27). It is also possible that Solomon’s words of dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 8:12-13) were included. According to the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT), the writer of that passage uses the same language as in Joshua 10:12-13 and asks rhetorically if Solomon’s statement were written in the book of “Song.” Some scholars believe that this question may have accidentally dropped out of the Hebrew text since the whole quotation appears in the Septuagint following Solomon’s prayer of 1 Kings 8:14-53. It is also likely that some Hebrew letters may have been transposed so that the Septuagint reads “Song” instead of “Jashar.” If one accepts these assumptions, then 1 Kings 8:12-13 would have been part of the Book of Jashar.<\/p>\n<p>It is also possible that the Septuagint rendering, “Book of Song,” is the more correct title. All of the quotations are poetry; the term “Jashar” has never been explained satisfactorily; and “Jashar” has similarities to various Hebrew root forms meaning “to sing.” Hence, some scholars believe that “Book of Song” is a more correct title.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of the book cannot be determined with certainty except to say that it probably contained a wide variety of songs. This is evident as one considers the types of materials contained in the three passages mentioned above. One is an appeal for the prolonging of daylight in order for Israel to complete a military victory; one is an example of David’s literary skill and an expression of the national importance and close friendship of the persons involved; and one is an exclamation extolling God’s supremacy over ritual and nature.<\/p>\n<p>The origin of the Book of Jashar is more clouded in obscurity than is its content. Some believe that it was a written collection of songs dating to the days before the monarchy. Some think that it was an oral tradition dating approximately from the time of Solomon. Others suggest that it was a vital instrument in the establishment of literary archives during the monarchy to preserve the notable events of Israelites. This has led to the suggestion that the Song of Miriam (Ex 15:21) and the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5) may have been part of the collection.<\/p>\n<p>The book has long interested many people, and this interest has led to various false imitations, false identifications, and false reproductions of it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JASHAR, Book of This was an ancient Hebrew writing that is no longer extant. It was probably a national songbook containing songs praising the exploits of Hebrew heroes. It is mentioned in the OT account of Joshua’s command to the sun and moon to stand still during the battle with the five kings (Jos 10:13) and in the account of David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sm 1:17-27). It is also possible that Solomon’s words of dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 8:12-13) were included. According to...","summary_en":"JASHAR, Book of This was an ancient Hebrew writing that is no longer extant. It was probably a national songbook containing songs praising the exploits of Hebrew heroes. It is mentioned in the OT account of Joshua’s command to the sun and moon to stand still during the battle with the five kings (Jos 10:13) and in the account of David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sm 1:17-27). It is also possible that Solomon’s words of dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 8:12-13) were included. According to...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38189,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of the Wars of the Lord","title_en":"Book of the Wars of the Lord","content_ro":"<h3>WARS OF THE LORD, Book of the<\/h3>\n<p>Document mentioned once in the OT (Nm 21:14); it is found in a description of Moab’s border at the Arnon. The book was used as a source but is no longer extant. It probably contained a record of Israel’s conquest in Transjordan and may be identical to the “Book of the Upright [Jashar]” (Jos 10:13; 2 Sm 1:18). The passage in Numbers 21 has a poetic style and pertains to Israel’s conquest and warfare. However, the extent of the quotation is debatable. Some limit it to verse 14, others include verse 15, and still others include verses 27-30.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WARS OF THE LORD, Book of the<\/h3>\n<p>Document mentioned once in the OT (Nm 21:14); it is found in a description of Moab’s border at the Arnon. The book was used as a source but is no longer extant. It probably contained a record of Israel’s conquest in Transjordan and may be identical to the “Book of the Upright [Jashar]” (Jos 10:13; 2 Sm 1:18). The passage in Numbers 21 has a poetic style and pertains to Israel’s conquest and warfare. However, the extent of the quotation is debatable. Some limit it to verse 14, others include verse 15, and still others include verses 27-30.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WARS OF THE LORD, Book of the Document mentioned once in the OT (Nm 21:14); it is found in a description of Moab’s border at the Arnon. The book was used as a source but is no longer extant. It probably contained a record of Israel’s conquest in Transjordan and may be identical to the “Book of the Upright [Jashar]” (Jos 10:13; 2 Sm 1:18). The passage in Numbers 21 has a poetic style and pertains to Israel’s conquest and warfare. However, the extent of the quotation is debatable. Some limit it...","summary_en":"WARS OF THE LORD, Book of the Document mentioned once in the OT (Nm 21:14); it is found in a description of Moab’s border at the Arnon. The book was used as a source but is no longer extant. It probably contained a record of Israel’s conquest in Transjordan and may be identical to the “Book of the Upright [Jashar]” (Jos 10:13; 2 Sm 1:18). The passage in Numbers 21 has a poetic style and pertains to Israel’s conquest and warfare. However, the extent of the quotation is debatable. Some limit it...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45461,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:13","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> God caused the <em>sun<\/em> to stay <em>in the middle of the sky.<\/em> Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • <em>The Book of Jashar<\/em> served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> God caused the <em>sun<\/em> to stay <em>in the middle of the sky.<\/em> Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • <em>The Book of Jashar<\/em> served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:13 God caused the sun to stay in the middle of the sky. Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • The Book of Jashar served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.","summary_en":"10:13 God caused the sun to stay in the middle of the sky. Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • The Book of Jashar served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73087,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:13","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> God caused the <em>sun<\/em> to stay <em>in the middle of the sky.<\/em> Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • <em>The Book of Jashar<\/em> served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> God caused the <em>sun<\/em> to stay <em>in the middle of the sky.<\/em> Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • <em>The Book of Jashar<\/em> served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:13 God caused the sun to stay in the middle of the sky. Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • The Book of Jashar served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.","summary_en":"10:13 God caused the sun to stay in the middle of the sky. Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • The Book of Jashar served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100713,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:13","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> God caused the <em>sun<\/em> to stay <em>in the middle of the sky.<\/em> Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • <em>The Book of Jashar<\/em> served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> God caused the <em>sun<\/em> to stay <em>in the middle of the sky.<\/em> Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • <em>The Book of Jashar<\/em> served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:13 God caused the sun to stay in the middle of the sky. Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • The Book of Jashar served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.","summary_en":"10:13 God caused the sun to stay in the middle of the sky. Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • The Book of Jashar served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128339,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:13","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> God caused the <em>sun<\/em> to stay <em>in the middle of the sky.<\/em> Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • <em>The Book of Jashar<\/em> served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:13<\/strong> God caused the <em>sun<\/em> to stay <em>in the middle of the sky.<\/em> Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • <em>The Book of Jashar<\/em> served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:13 God caused the sun to stay in the middle of the sky. Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • The Book of Jashar served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.","summary_en":"10:13 God caused the sun to stay in the middle of the sky. Not all miracles can be understood, whether in purpose, in scope, or in mechanism. • The Book of Jashar served as one of the ancient sources for Israel’s historians. While well known in ancient Israel, it did not survive as a separate document.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":20782,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":630,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adoni-Zedek","title_en":"Adoni-Zedek","content_ro":"<h3>ADONI-ZEDEK<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADONI-ZEDEK<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADONI-ZEDEK Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27). See also Conquest and Allotment of the Land.","summary_en":"ADONI-ZEDEK Amorite king of Jerusalem at the time of the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land (Jos 10:1-5). A battle between the Amorites and Israelites for control of Gibeon was the occasion on which Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still (Jos 10:6-15). The Israelites won a decisive victory. Adoni-zedek and four other enemy kings were discovered hiding in a cave and were executed by Joshua (Jos 10:16-27). See also Conquest and Allotment of the Land.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16515,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hoham","title_en":"Hoham","content_ro":"<h3>HOHAM<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Hebron, confederate with four other kings in reprisals against Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos 10:3). They were defeated and put to death at the cave of Makkedah (vv 16-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOHAM<\/h3>\n<p>Amorite king of Hebron, confederate with four other kings in reprisals against Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos 10:3). They were defeated and put to death at the cave of Makkedah (vv 16-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOHAM Amorite king of Hebron, confederate with four other kings in reprisals against Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos 10:3). They were defeated and put to death at the cave of Makkedah (vv 16-27).","summary_en":"HOHAM Amorite king of Hebron, confederate with four other kings in reprisals against Gibeon for making peace with Joshua (Jos 10:3). They were defeated and put to death at the cave of Makkedah (vv 16-27).","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19218,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>JERUSALEM<\/h3>\n<p>Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n<p>• Geographical Situation<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningoftheName\">Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n<h5>Egyptian Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries <span>BC<\/span> in the form probably transliterated <em>Urusalimum.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the 14th century <span>BC<\/span> the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Amarna, written <em>Urusalim.<\/em> Later it is found in the inscription of the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib, written <em>Ursalimmu.<\/em> The two transparently Semitic elements, <em>uru<\/em> (city) and <em>salim<\/em> (a divine name), have produced the hyphenated composite meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.” Hyphenating geographic names to incorporate divine elements was a common practice in the ancient Near Eastern world, and the deity Salim, or Shalem (Akkadian, Shulmanu; cf. Solomon), was a member of the Amorite pantheon (cf. Ez 16:3). Since the oldest textual evidence—Egyptian, West Semitic, and Akkadian—supports only <em>urusalim,<\/em> and since the OT itself attests that Jerusalem was not originally a Hebrew city, it is probable that the Semitic etymological origin of this name produced the meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.”<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew\/Aramaic Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the Hebrew OT, Jerusalem is written <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yerushalayim<\/span><em>,<\/em> and in the Aramaic portions the name is rendered <em>yerushalem.<\/em> Containing the elements <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yarah<\/span> (“to found,” cf. Jb 38:6) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalem<\/span> (a divine name), it yields the meaning “the foundation of [the god] Shalem,” the <em>sh<\/em> of the Hebrew\/Aramaic to be taken as the phonemic equivalent of the Akkadian <em>s.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Greek Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the NT, Jerusalem translates the two Greek words <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Ierousalem<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hierosoluma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The former is simply the Greek transliteration of the OT Aramaic form; the latter reflects the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieros<\/span> (holy), representing a Hellenized paronomasia, corresponding neither with the Semitic root of the name nor with the city’s historical reality.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeographicalSituation\">Geographical Situation<\/p>\n<p>Jerusalem is situated 31º 46’ 45” north latitude and 35º 13’ 25” east longitude. The city rises to just over 2,500 feet (762 meters) above sea level and rests some 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) west of the northern end of the Dead Sea and approximately 33 miles (53 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean coast.<\/p>\n<p>A Mediterranean climate pervades Jerusalem. From October to May, the city experiences its rainy season, with an annual accumulation of about 25 inches (63.5 centimeters). Throughout January and February the rains are often driven by winds, and the mercury drops to near freezing (cf. Ezr 10:9); the coldest weather coincides with the days of heaviest rainfall. Snow falls two years out of three. There is no rain between May and September, and a high percentage of solar radiation produces oppressive heat.<\/p>\n<p>Like Rome, Jerusalem is a city set on hills. A cluster of five hills comprise the denuded quadrilateral landmass roughly one mile (1.6 kilometers) long and one-half mile (.8 kilometer) wide, bordered on all sides, except the north, by deep ravines. Stationed astride the crest of Palestine’s central plateau and located at the crossroad of the watershed route connecting Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem (Nablus), and points north with the longitudinal route from the Jordan Valley and the several arteries to the Mediterranean, Jerusalem is commercially central to the country. The lateral highway through the Judean mountains and eastward could not pass south of Jerusalem, being blocked by the Dead Sea and its sheer cliffs. Because it lacked significant water supply, the city’s strategic commercial location was probably the deciding criterion for its original occupation.<\/p>\n<p>Water, a lifeline of civilization, has always been in meager supply at Jerusalem. The only natural source of permanent water was the spring at Gihon, today sometimes called the Virgin’s Fountain, located in the Kidron Valley immediately east of the ancient fortress conquered by David. Tunnels were burrowed to provide access to the Gihon when Jerusalem was besieged. Later, the Siloam Tunnel was cut through nearly 1,800 feet (548.6 meters) of limestone, allowing the waters of the Gihon to pass through the hill of Zion to the pool of Siloam.<\/p>\n<p>Farther south, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys converge, there was another spring, called En-rogel in the Bible (modern Bir Eyyub). Owing to the lowering of the water table, this source of water ceased to percolate and was subsequently converted into a well.<\/p>\n<p>These two sources were clearly insufficient to sustain a sizable population, and both were too deep in the Kidron to be employed for irrigation. Hence, a vast network of cisterns, reservoirs, and water conduits for supplemental supply has been devised since ancient times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<h5>The Pre-Israelite Period<\/h5>\n<p>Paleolithic and Mesolithic flint implements of an Acheulian type found in the plain of the Rephaim constitute the earliest evidence of the existence of human beings in the area of Jerusalem. Near the beginning of the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span>, the southeastern hill was first occupied by a sedentary group, a fact evinced from the artifactual remains recovered from three graves and the pottery type discovered on bedrock. By 1800 <span>BC<\/span>, the crest of the southeastern hill was walled in rudimentary form.<\/p>\n<p>From the Bible one learns that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gn 14:17-20). Again (ch 22) the great patriarch visited an area later incorporated into Jerusalem, Mt Moriah, the site where Isaac was nearly sacrificed. Second Chronicles 3:1 identifies Mt Moriah as the temple hill. In the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> or thereabouts the Hurrians (possibly the biblical Horites) penetrated into Palestine. About the same time at Jerusalem, extensive building activities were initiated and improved fortification methods were introduced. Accordingly, most writers attribute these projects at Jerusalem to the Hurrian infiltration.<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest and Settlement Period<\/h5>\n<p>Upon learning of Gibeon’s placation of Joshua’s army (Jos 9), Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, formed a coalition with the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon and attacked Gibeon. In response, Joshua marshaled his forces and defeated the coalition, killing all five monarchs at Makkedah (Jos 10:16-27). It appears that the tribe of Judah temporarily took control of Jerusalem and burned it in the wake of this victory (Jgs 1:8). However, the Jebusites reoccupied the site (Jos 15:63; 1 Chr 11:4-5). Apparently, the Jebusites more or less maintained control of Jerusalem until the time of David.<\/p>\n<p>The city appears again as a boundary separating the tribal inheritances of Judah and Benjamin, becoming the southern border of the latter’s domain. The identification of the “shoulder of the Jebusite” (<span>rsv<\/span> Jos 15:8; 18:16) with Jerusalem is usually explained as a reference to the southwestern hill, probably held also by the Jebusites at this time.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>Following the Philistine victory atop Mt Gilboa, where Saul and Jonathan were killed in battle (1 Sm 31), David reigned over the tribe of Judah from Hebron, while a surviving son of Saul, Ishbosheth, ruled over the northern tribes from Mahanaim. During the two-year struggle that ensued, the house of David grew stronger while the forces of Ishbosheth shrunk considerably (2 Sm 3:1). This struggle culminated in the death and decapitation of Ishbosheth and the dispersion of his forces. David became the undisputed monarch of all the tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>But the new monarch recognized that a consolidated national capital acceptable to both the north and the south would have to be created. Jerusalem had remained neutral in the conflict, being the site of a Jebusite enclave. It also represented a location that was militarily desirable, and by being commercially central to the fledgling nation, it was ideally suited.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of David’s 33-year reign at Jerusalem he made the city into the center of an empire that stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates River. He engaged in considerable building and expansion of the city. He fortified the Canaanite walls and prepared an extension of the city, possibly along the east slope of Zion.<\/p>\n<p>David also constructed a royal residence, receiving the technology and many materials from Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sm 5:11). Nehemiah 12:37 suggests that this palace also may have been near the east side of the southeastern hill. It was from a window of this house that Michal saw David dancing in an undignified manner—according to her perception (2 Sm 6:16-23). From the roof of this palace David gazed upon Bathsheba as she bathed (11:2-5), and from this residence he plotted the murder of her husband, Uriah (vv 14-25).<\/p>\n<p>By bringing the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:1-15)—implying that Yahweh would reside there—David displayed his most profound leadership. For in this perceptive act he merged for the first time in Israel’s history its political and religious capitals. Jerusalem took on the unique character of a holy city <em>and<\/em> a royal city. As a result, the city would be known as the “city of David” (5:7) as well as the “city of God” (Ps 46:4). Adult male Jews would make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem to take part in the feasts and offerings. It only remained for David to make this arrangement permanent, to enshrine Yahweh at Jerusalem forever by building him a temple. David aspired to do so (2 Sm 7), but God responded that such an undertaking was to be reserved for a son of the king.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Temple Period<\/h5>\n<p>A growing national realization of the extent and impact of the Davidic empire was employed by Solomon to full advantage. Himself an innovative and dynamic administrator, Solomon turned Jerusalem into a cosmopolitan center. The revenues of caravans from Egypt to Babylonia as well as the Phoenician trade with Elath, the Red Sea, and Ophir passed through his royal capital. Solomon’s own naval fleet traveled as far as Tarshish, most likely located on an island along the western coast of Spain. These expeditions returned every three years with such exotic commodities as apes, peacocks, silver, iron, tin, ivory, and gold. The capital swelled with residents and visitors, and the monarch’s fame became proverbial (1 Kgs 10).<\/p>\n<p>Solomon was the great OT builder of Jerusalem. His most significant building enterprise was undoubtedly the first temple. Erected on the summit of the temple hill, this edifice required seven years to construct, from April\/May 966 (1 Kgs 6:1) to October\/November 959 (v 38). Hiram again provided both the technology and the cedar beams.<\/p>\n<p>One may find in 1 Kings 10:27 a succinct encapsulation of the economic wealth lavished upon Jerusalem by Solomon: silver became as abundant as stone, and cedar was as common as sycamore. It is estimated that the annual revenues that coursed into Jerusalem were as high as $17 million. Ironically, it was the fiscal factor that became the burden of Solomon’s monarchy. Overextending himself financially, his economic and political programs soon required the levying of heavy taxes (1 Kgs 4:7-19) and the drafting of Israelites into forced labor (1 Kgs 5:13-18; cf. 9:20-23). These were the primary factors that prompted the schism in Israel’s political structure after the death of Solomon and resulted in a divided monarchy by 930 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian army laid final siege to Jerusalem (588 <span>BC<\/span>), capturing it after many months, the city was completely decimated. The temple and Solomon’s palace were destroyed with fire; the city walls were demolished. The temple treasures were completely plundered, and the citizens were deported in large numbers.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Temple Period<\/h5>\n<p>Jerusalem’s doom and 70-year captivity had been spelled out by Jeremiah (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. 2 Chr 36:21; Dn 9:2). In 538 <span>BC<\/span>, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous proclamation (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-4; cf. Is 44:28; 45:1). Thereupon, a humble group of Jews returned to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah (Ezr 1:8-11) and Zerubbabel (2:2). In 515 <span>BC<\/span>, the doors of the second temple were opened officially, and the Passover feast was again observed from Jerusalem (6:15-18).<\/p>\n<p>Ezra came to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezr 7:7). Assuming this is a reference to Artaxerxes I, the date of Ezra’s return would have been 458 <span>BC<\/span>. Again, it was only a meager remnant who felt the compelling urge to make that difficult journey (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.1.3).<\/p>\n<p>Moved by reports of troubled conditions (Neh 1:3-4), Nehemiah, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (445 <span>BC<\/span>), was able to leave his post as cup-bearer to the king and to go to Jerusalem. If the concern of the earlier returnees focused upon the temple, Nehemiah’s was upon the city walls. His is the most comprehensive description of Jerusalem’s postexilic city walls and topography (Neh 2:11-16). Spurred on by his energetic enthusiasm, the people completed the task of rebuilding the walls in 52 days (6:15).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Roman Period<\/h5>\n<p>In 40 <span>BC<\/span>, with the aid of the Parthians, Antigonus attacked and seized Jerusalem, forcing Herod to escape by night. He journeyed to Rome, where the Senate appointed him as “king of the Jews” (cf. Mt 2:1). Armed with this new authority, Herod marshaled two Roman legions, and in 37 <span>BC<\/span>, he succeeded in forever expelling the Parthians. So began the long and infamous rule of Herod, who reigned at Jerusalem for 33 years (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It cannot be denied that Jerusalem enjoyed prosperous and peaceful years during his reign. Herod transformed the external aspect of Jerusalem. He transferred the seat of government to the southwestern hill. Here he erected a lavish palace, an arena for athletic contests, a theater, and a vast aqueduct network.<\/p>\n<p>Other building projects concerned the temple hill. Herod transformed the old Maccabean fortress into a much larger structure and named it Antonia, in honor of Mark Antony. In the temple area proper he enlarged the esplanade on both the north and south sides, giving it a rectangular shape. Herod’s reconstruction of the temple was undertaken in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and it was not completed until around <span>AD<\/span> 64, just six years prior to its destruction by Titus (cf. Jn 2:20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jerusalem, New; Judaism; Zion; Zion, Daughter of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JERUSALEM<\/h3>\n<p>Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n<p>• Geographical Situation<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningoftheName\">Meaning of the Name<\/p>\n<h5>Egyptian Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries <span>BC<\/span> in the form probably transliterated <em>Urusalimum.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the 14th century <span>BC<\/span> the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Amarna, written <em>Urusalim.<\/em> Later it is found in the inscription of the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib, written <em>Ursalimmu.<\/em> The two transparently Semitic elements, <em>uru<\/em> (city) and <em>salim<\/em> (a divine name), have produced the hyphenated composite meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.” Hyphenating geographic names to incorporate divine elements was a common practice in the ancient Near Eastern world, and the deity Salim, or Shalem (Akkadian, Shulmanu; cf. Solomon), was a member of the Amorite pantheon (cf. Ez 16:3). Since the oldest textual evidence—Egyptian, West Semitic, and Akkadian—supports only <em>urusalim,<\/em> and since the OT itself attests that Jerusalem was not originally a Hebrew city, it is probable that the Semitic etymological origin of this name produced the meaning “the city of [the god] Salim.”<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrew\/Aramaic Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the Hebrew OT, Jerusalem is written <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yerushalayim<\/span><em>,<\/em> and in the Aramaic portions the name is rendered <em>yerushalem.<\/em> Containing the elements <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yarah<\/span> (“to found,” cf. Jb 38:6) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalem<\/span> (a divine name), it yields the meaning “the foundation of [the god] Shalem,” the <em>sh<\/em> of the Hebrew\/Aramaic to be taken as the phonemic equivalent of the Akkadian <em>s.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Greek Meaning<\/h5>\n<p>In the NT, Jerusalem translates the two Greek words <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Ierousalem<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hierosoluma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The former is simply the Greek transliteration of the OT Aramaic form; the latter reflects the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hieros<\/span> (holy), representing a Hellenized paronomasia, corresponding neither with the Semitic root of the name nor with the city’s historical reality.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeographicalSituation\">Geographical Situation<\/p>\n<p>Jerusalem is situated 31º 46’ 45” north latitude and 35º 13’ 25” east longitude. The city rises to just over 2,500 feet (762 meters) above sea level and rests some 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) west of the northern end of the Dead Sea and approximately 33 miles (53 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean coast.<\/p>\n<p>A Mediterranean climate pervades Jerusalem. From October to May, the city experiences its rainy season, with an annual accumulation of about 25 inches (63.5 centimeters). Throughout January and February the rains are often driven by winds, and the mercury drops to near freezing (cf. Ezr 10:9); the coldest weather coincides with the days of heaviest rainfall. Snow falls two years out of three. There is no rain between May and September, and a high percentage of solar radiation produces oppressive heat.<\/p>\n<p>Like Rome, Jerusalem is a city set on hills. A cluster of five hills comprise the denuded quadrilateral landmass roughly one mile (1.6 kilometers) long and one-half mile (.8 kilometer) wide, bordered on all sides, except the north, by deep ravines. Stationed astride the crest of Palestine’s central plateau and located at the crossroad of the watershed route connecting Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem (Nablus), and points north with the longitudinal route from the Jordan Valley and the several arteries to the Mediterranean, Jerusalem is commercially central to the country. The lateral highway through the Judean mountains and eastward could not pass south of Jerusalem, being blocked by the Dead Sea and its sheer cliffs. Because it lacked significant water supply, the city’s strategic commercial location was probably the deciding criterion for its original occupation.<\/p>\n<p>Water, a lifeline of civilization, has always been in meager supply at Jerusalem. The only natural source of permanent water was the spring at Gihon, today sometimes called the Virgin’s Fountain, located in the Kidron Valley immediately east of the ancient fortress conquered by David. Tunnels were burrowed to provide access to the Gihon when Jerusalem was besieged. Later, the Siloam Tunnel was cut through nearly 1,800 feet (548.6 meters) of limestone, allowing the waters of the Gihon to pass through the hill of Zion to the pool of Siloam.<\/p>\n<p>Farther south, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys converge, there was another spring, called En-rogel in the Bible (modern Bir Eyyub). Owing to the lowering of the water table, this source of water ceased to percolate and was subsequently converted into a well.<\/p>\n<p>These two sources were clearly insufficient to sustain a sizable population, and both were too deep in the Kidron to be employed for irrigation. Hence, a vast network of cisterns, reservoirs, and water conduits for supplemental supply has been devised since ancient times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<h5>The Pre-Israelite Period<\/h5>\n<p>Paleolithic and Mesolithic flint implements of an Acheulian type found in the plain of the Rephaim constitute the earliest evidence of the existence of human beings in the area of Jerusalem. Near the beginning of the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span>, the southeastern hill was first occupied by a sedentary group, a fact evinced from the artifactual remains recovered from three graves and the pottery type discovered on bedrock. By 1800 <span>BC<\/span>, the crest of the southeastern hill was walled in rudimentary form.<\/p>\n<p>From the Bible one learns that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gn 14:17-20). Again (ch 22) the great patriarch visited an area later incorporated into Jerusalem, Mt Moriah, the site where Isaac was nearly sacrificed. Second Chronicles 3:1 identifies Mt Moriah as the temple hill. In the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> or thereabouts the Hurrians (possibly the biblical Horites) penetrated into Palestine. About the same time at Jerusalem, extensive building activities were initiated and improved fortification methods were introduced. Accordingly, most writers attribute these projects at Jerusalem to the Hurrian infiltration.<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest and Settlement Period<\/h5>\n<p>Upon learning of Gibeon’s placation of Joshua’s army (Jos 9), Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem, formed a coalition with the kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon and attacked Gibeon. In response, Joshua marshaled his forces and defeated the coalition, killing all five monarchs at Makkedah (Jos 10:16-27). It appears that the tribe of Judah temporarily took control of Jerusalem and burned it in the wake of this victory (Jgs 1:8). However, the Jebusites reoccupied the site (Jos 15:63; 1 Chr 11:4-5). Apparently, the Jebusites more or less maintained control of Jerusalem until the time of David.<\/p>\n<p>The city appears again as a boundary separating the tribal inheritances of Judah and Benjamin, becoming the southern border of the latter’s domain. The identification of the “shoulder of the Jebusite” (<span>rsv<\/span> Jos 15:8; 18:16) with Jerusalem is usually explained as a reference to the southwestern hill, probably held also by the Jebusites at this time.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>Following the Philistine victory atop Mt Gilboa, where Saul and Jonathan were killed in battle (1 Sm 31), David reigned over the tribe of Judah from Hebron, while a surviving son of Saul, Ishbosheth, ruled over the northern tribes from Mahanaim. During the two-year struggle that ensued, the house of David grew stronger while the forces of Ishbosheth shrunk considerably (2 Sm 3:1). This struggle culminated in the death and decapitation of Ishbosheth and the dispersion of his forces. David became the undisputed monarch of all the tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>But the new monarch recognized that a consolidated national capital acceptable to both the north and the south would have to be created. Jerusalem had remained neutral in the conflict, being the site of a Jebusite enclave. It also represented a location that was militarily desirable, and by being commercially central to the fledgling nation, it was ideally suited.<\/p>\n<p>In the course of David’s 33-year reign at Jerusalem he made the city into the center of an empire that stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates River. He engaged in considerable building and expansion of the city. He fortified the Canaanite walls and prepared an extension of the city, possibly along the east slope of Zion.<\/p>\n<p>David also constructed a royal residence, receiving the technology and many materials from Hiram, king of Tyre (2 Sm 5:11). Nehemiah 12:37 suggests that this palace also may have been near the east side of the southeastern hill. It was from a window of this house that Michal saw David dancing in an undignified manner—according to her perception (2 Sm 6:16-23). From the roof of this palace David gazed upon Bathsheba as she bathed (11:2-5), and from this residence he plotted the murder of her husband, Uriah (vv 14-25).<\/p>\n<p>By bringing the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sm 6:1-15)—implying that Yahweh would reside there—David displayed his most profound leadership. For in this perceptive act he merged for the first time in Israel’s history its political and religious capitals. Jerusalem took on the unique character of a holy city <em>and<\/em> a royal city. As a result, the city would be known as the “city of David” (5:7) as well as the “city of God” (Ps 46:4). Adult male Jews would make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem to take part in the feasts and offerings. It only remained for David to make this arrangement permanent, to enshrine Yahweh at Jerusalem forever by building him a temple. David aspired to do so (2 Sm 7), but God responded that such an undertaking was to be reserved for a son of the king.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Temple Period<\/h5>\n<p>A growing national realization of the extent and impact of the Davidic empire was employed by Solomon to full advantage. Himself an innovative and dynamic administrator, Solomon turned Jerusalem into a cosmopolitan center. The revenues of caravans from Egypt to Babylonia as well as the Phoenician trade with Elath, the Red Sea, and Ophir passed through his royal capital. Solomon’s own naval fleet traveled as far as Tarshish, most likely located on an island along the western coast of Spain. These expeditions returned every three years with such exotic commodities as apes, peacocks, silver, iron, tin, ivory, and gold. The capital swelled with residents and visitors, and the monarch’s fame became proverbial (1 Kgs 10).<\/p>\n<p>Solomon was the great OT builder of Jerusalem. His most significant building enterprise was undoubtedly the first temple. Erected on the summit of the temple hill, this edifice required seven years to construct, from April\/May 966 (1 Kgs 6:1) to October\/November 959 (v 38). Hiram again provided both the technology and the cedar beams.<\/p>\n<p>One may find in 1 Kings 10:27 a succinct encapsulation of the economic wealth lavished upon Jerusalem by Solomon: silver became as abundant as stone, and cedar was as common as sycamore. It is estimated that the annual revenues that coursed into Jerusalem were as high as $17 million. Ironically, it was the fiscal factor that became the burden of Solomon’s monarchy. Overextending himself financially, his economic and political programs soon required the levying of heavy taxes (1 Kgs 4:7-19) and the drafting of Israelites into forced labor (1 Kgs 5:13-18; cf. 9:20-23). These were the primary factors that prompted the schism in Israel’s political structure after the death of Solomon and resulted in a divided monarchy by 930 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian army laid final siege to Jerusalem (588 <span>BC<\/span>), capturing it after many months, the city was completely decimated. The temple and Solomon’s palace were destroyed with fire; the city walls were demolished. The temple treasures were completely plundered, and the citizens were deported in large numbers.<\/p>\n<h5>The Second Temple Period<\/h5>\n<p>Jerusalem’s doom and 70-year captivity had been spelled out by Jeremiah (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. 2 Chr 36:21; Dn 9:2). In 538 <span>BC<\/span>, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous proclamation (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1:1-4; cf. Is 44:28; 45:1). Thereupon, a humble group of Jews returned to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah (Ezr 1:8-11) and Zerubbabel (2:2). In 515 <span>BC<\/span>, the doors of the second temple were opened officially, and the Passover feast was again observed from Jerusalem (6:15-18).<\/p>\n<p>Ezra came to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezr 7:7). Assuming this is a reference to Artaxerxes I, the date of Ezra’s return would have been 458 <span>BC<\/span>. Again, it was only a meager remnant who felt the compelling urge to make that difficult journey (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 11.1.3).<\/p>\n<p>Moved by reports of troubled conditions (Neh 1:3-4), Nehemiah, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes (445 <span>BC<\/span>), was able to leave his post as cup-bearer to the king and to go to Jerusalem. If the concern of the earlier returnees focused upon the temple, Nehemiah’s was upon the city walls. His is the most comprehensive description of Jerusalem’s postexilic city walls and topography (Neh 2:11-16). Spurred on by his energetic enthusiasm, the people completed the task of rebuilding the walls in 52 days (6:15).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Roman Period<\/h5>\n<p>In 40 <span>BC<\/span>, with the aid of the Parthians, Antigonus attacked and seized Jerusalem, forcing Herod to escape by night. He journeyed to Rome, where the Senate appointed him as “king of the Jews” (cf. Mt 2:1). Armed with this new authority, Herod marshaled two Roman legions, and in 37 <span>BC<\/span>, he succeeded in forever expelling the Parthians. So began the long and infamous rule of Herod, who reigned at Jerusalem for 33 years (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It cannot be denied that Jerusalem enjoyed prosperous and peaceful years during his reign. Herod transformed the external aspect of Jerusalem. He transferred the seat of government to the southwestern hill. Here he erected a lavish palace, an arena for athletic contests, a theater, and a vast aqueduct network.<\/p>\n<p>Other building projects concerned the temple hill. Herod transformed the old Maccabean fortress into a much larger structure and named it Antonia, in honor of Mark Antony. In the temple area proper he enlarged the esplanade on both the north and south sides, giving it a rectangular shape. Herod’s reconstruction of the temple was undertaken in 20 <span>BC<\/span>, and it was not completed until around <span>AD<\/span> 64, just six years prior to its destruction by Titus (cf. Jn 2:20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jerusalem, New; Judaism; Zion; Zion, Daughter of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JERUSALEM Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel. Preview • Meaning of the Name • Geographical Situation • History Meaning of the Name Egyptian Meaning The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum. Semitic Meaning In the 14th century BC the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Ama...","summary_en":"JERUSALEM Historic city sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims; the chief city of ancient Palestine and of the modern state of Israel. Preview • Meaning of the Name • Geographical Situation • History Meaning of the Name Egyptian Meaning The earliest mention of the name occurs in the Egyptian Execration Texts of the 19th and 18th centuries BC in the form probably transliterated Urusalimum. Semitic Meaning In the 14th century BC the name appears in the Abdi-Hepa correspondence from Tell el-Ama...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20783,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45462,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:16","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:16<\/strong> The <em>five kings<\/em> had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of <em>Makkedah<\/em> is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:16<\/strong> The <em>five kings<\/em> had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of <em>Makkedah<\/em> is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:16 The five kings had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of Makkedah is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.","summary_en":"10:16 The five kings had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of Makkedah is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73088,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:16","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:16<\/strong> The <em>five kings<\/em> had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of <em>Makkedah<\/em> is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:16<\/strong> The <em>five kings<\/em> had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of <em>Makkedah<\/em> is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:16 The five kings had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of Makkedah is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.","summary_en":"10:16 The five kings had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of Makkedah is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100714,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:16","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:16<\/strong> The <em>five kings<\/em> had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of <em>Makkedah<\/em> is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:16<\/strong> The <em>five kings<\/em> had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of <em>Makkedah<\/em> is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:16 The five kings had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of Makkedah is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.","summary_en":"10:16 The five kings had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of Makkedah is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128340,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:16","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:16<\/strong> The <em>five kings<\/em> had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of <em>Makkedah<\/em> is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:16<\/strong> The <em>five kings<\/em> had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of <em>Makkedah<\/em> is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:16 The five kings had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of Makkedah is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.","summary_en":"10:16 The five kings had led the southern coalition against God’s people. • Although the location of Makkedah is uncertain, it was in the same district as Lachish (15:39-41) in the southern part of the western foothills, about twenty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. Limestone caves are numerous in that region.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":45463,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:18","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:18-19<\/strong> By blocking <em>the opening of the cave,<\/em> Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:18-19<\/strong> By blocking <em>the opening of the cave,<\/em> Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:18-19 By blocking the opening of the cave, Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.","summary_en":"10:18-19 By blocking the opening of the cave, Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73089,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:18","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:18-19<\/strong> By blocking <em>the opening of the cave,<\/em> Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:18-19<\/strong> By blocking <em>the opening of the cave,<\/em> Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:18-19 By blocking the opening of the cave, Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.","summary_en":"10:18-19 By blocking the opening of the cave, Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100715,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:18","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:18-19<\/strong> By blocking <em>the opening of the cave,<\/em> Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:18-19<\/strong> By blocking <em>the opening of the cave,<\/em> Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:18-19 By blocking the opening of the cave, Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.","summary_en":"10:18-19 By blocking the opening of the cave, Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128341,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:18","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:18-19<\/strong> By blocking <em>the opening of the cave,<\/em> Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:18-19<\/strong> By blocking <em>the opening of the cave,<\/em> Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:18-19 By blocking the opening of the cave, Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.","summary_en":"10:18-19 By blocking the opening of the cave, Joshua reduced the number of guards needed to keep the kings from escaping. This also eliminated danger to the guards and freed more men to pursue the fleeing people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":29331,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peace","title_en":"Peace","content_ro":"<h3>PEACE<\/h3>\n<p>Total well-being, prosperity, and security associated with God’s presence among his people. Linked in the OT with the covenant, the presence of peace was conditional, based on Israel’s obedience. In the prophetic writings, true peace is part of the end-time hope of God’s salvation. In the NT, this longed-for peace is understood as having come in Christ and can be experienced by the believers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> the most prominent OT term for “peace,” held a wide range of connotations (wholeness, health, security, well-being, and salvation) and could apply to an equally wide range of contexts: the state of the individual (Ps 37:37; Prv 3:2; Is 32:17), the relationship of person to person (Gn 34:21; Jos 9:15) or nation to nation (e.g., absence of conflict—Dt 2:26; Jos 10:21; 1 Kgs 5:12; Ps 122:6-7), and the relationship of God and people (Ps 85:8; Jer 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>The presence of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> in any of these contexts was not considered ultimately as the outcome of human endeavor but as a gift or blessing of God (Lv 26:6; 1 Kgs 2:33; Jb 25:2; Pss 29:11; 85:8; Is 45:7). It is not surprising, therefore, to find “peace” tied closely to the OT notion of covenant. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span> was the desired state of harmony and communion between the two covenant partners—God and his people (Nm 6:26; cf. Is 54:10). Its presence signified God’s blessing in the covenant relationship (Mal 2:5; cf. Nm 25:12), and its absence signified the breakdown of that relationship due to Israel’s disobedience and unrighteousness (Jer 16:5, 10-13; cf. Ps 85:9-11; Is 32:17).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span> becomes a pivotal term in the prophetic writings. It was the “false” prophets who, forgetting the conditions for national well-being within the covenant relationship, assumed God’s loyalty to Israel (Ps 89) would guarantee political peace forever (Jer 6:14; 8:15; Ez 13:10, 16; Mi 3:5). Against such popular but false security, the preexilic prophets proclaimed the coming judgment precisely as a loss of this <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> due to Israel’s persistent disobedience and unrighteousness (Is 48:18; Jer 14:13-16; 16:5, 10-13; 28; Mi 3:4, 9-12).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets did, however, point beyond the crises of exile and subsequent setbacks to a time when <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> characterized by prosperity and well-being (Is 45:7; Ez 34:25-26), absence of conflict (Is 2:2-4; 32:15-20; Ez 34:28-31), right relations (Is 11:1-5; Mi 4:1-4; Zec 8:9-13), restoration of harmony in nature (Is 11:6-9; Ez 47:1-12), and salvation (Is 52:7; 60:17; Ez 34:30-31; 37:26-28) would again return. Often this eschatological (or end-time) expectation of peace in the OT was associated with a messianic figure, as in Isaiah 9:6, where the future Messiah is termed the “Prince of Peace.” Moreover, his reign would be one of “peace” not only for Israel but throughout the whole earth (Zec 9:9-10). The OT ends with this hope of peace still unrealized in its full sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Greek term for “peace” used predominantly in the NT is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eirene<\/span><em>,<\/em> a word expanded from its classical Greek connotation of “rest” to include the various connotations of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> discussed above. As with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eirene<\/span> could be used as a greeting or farewell (as in “peace be with you”—Lk 10:5; Gal 6:16; Jas 2:16; cf. Jn 20:19), or could signify the cessation of conflict (national—Lk 14:32; Acts 12:20; or interpersonal—Rom 14:19; Eph 4:3), or the presence of domestic tranquillity (cf. 1 Cor 7:15).<\/p>\n<p>The chief issue concerns how Jesus incorporated the OT hope for the eschatological peace of God into his ministry. In the “benedictus” of Zechariah (Lk 1:67-79), the coming of Jesus as the Messiah is expected to “guide our feet into the way of peace” (v 79). So also the angelic testimony to the shepherds proclaims Jesus as the bringer of God’s peace to people (2:14). That is, Jesus as the Messiah would usher in God’s reign of peace. Jesus’ self-understanding as expressed in the fourth Gospel corresponds to this association. This long-expected peace of God is Jesus’ farewell gift to the disciples (Jn 14:27); it is given to them when he breathed his Spirit into them (20:19-22).<\/p>\n<p>The nature of this gift of peace brought by Jesus may be easier to explain by stating what it is not. It is not an end to tension or the absence of warfare. It is not domestic tranquillity nor anything like the worldly estimation of peace (Lk 12:51-53; Jn 14:27; 16:32-33). Its presence may, on the contrary, actually disturb existing relations, being a dividing “sword” in familial relations (Mt 10:34-37). Jesus’ gift of peace is, in reality, the character and mood of the new covenant of his blood that reconciles God to people (Rom 5:1; Col 1:20) and forms the basis of subsequent reconciliation between divergent people (Eph 2:14-22).<\/p>\n<p>The early church understood “peace” to be the final, end-time salvation of God given already through Jesus Christ (cf. Phil 4:7-9). This understanding of “peace” altered the content of the common greeting “go in peace” as it was taken up in the Christian community. In Paul’s common “grace and peace” greeting (1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2, etc.; cf. also 1 Pt 1:2; 2 Jn 1:3; Jude 1:2; Rv 1:4), it is no longer a mere wish for peace that Paul extends to his readers but is a reminder of the messianic gifts available in the present time through Christ to the man of faith. In accord with this, Jesus is described as “peace” itself (Eph 2:14), while God, too, because of his act of reconciliation through Christ, is known as a “God of peace” (Phil 4:9; Col 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>This gift of peace or reconciliation with God, made available through Christ, places an ethical demand on the Christian; it calls for the exercises of “peace” (as reconciliation between persons) within the church. Peace, as a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), is to be the goal of the Christian’s dealings with others (Rom 12:18; 14:19; Heb 12:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PEACE<\/h3>\n<p>Total well-being, prosperity, and security associated with God’s presence among his people. Linked in the OT with the covenant, the presence of peace was conditional, based on Israel’s obedience. In the prophetic writings, true peace is part of the end-time hope of God’s salvation. In the NT, this longed-for peace is understood as having come in Christ and can be experienced by the believers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> the most prominent OT term for “peace,” held a wide range of connotations (wholeness, health, security, well-being, and salvation) and could apply to an equally wide range of contexts: the state of the individual (Ps 37:37; Prv 3:2; Is 32:17), the relationship of person to person (Gn 34:21; Jos 9:15) or nation to nation (e.g., absence of conflict—Dt 2:26; Jos 10:21; 1 Kgs 5:12; Ps 122:6-7), and the relationship of God and people (Ps 85:8; Jer 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>The presence of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> in any of these contexts was not considered ultimately as the outcome of human endeavor but as a gift or blessing of God (Lv 26:6; 1 Kgs 2:33; Jb 25:2; Pss 29:11; 85:8; Is 45:7). It is not surprising, therefore, to find “peace” tied closely to the OT notion of covenant. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span> was the desired state of harmony and communion between the two covenant partners—God and his people (Nm 6:26; cf. Is 54:10). Its presence signified God’s blessing in the covenant relationship (Mal 2:5; cf. Nm 25:12), and its absence signified the breakdown of that relationship due to Israel’s disobedience and unrighteousness (Jer 16:5, 10-13; cf. Ps 85:9-11; Is 32:17).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shalom<\/span> becomes a pivotal term in the prophetic writings. It was the “false” prophets who, forgetting the conditions for national well-being within the covenant relationship, assumed God’s loyalty to Israel (Ps 89) would guarantee political peace forever (Jer 6:14; 8:15; Ez 13:10, 16; Mi 3:5). Against such popular but false security, the preexilic prophets proclaimed the coming judgment precisely as a loss of this <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> due to Israel’s persistent disobedience and unrighteousness (Is 48:18; Jer 14:13-16; 16:5, 10-13; 28; Mi 3:4, 9-12).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets did, however, point beyond the crises of exile and subsequent setbacks to a time when <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> characterized by prosperity and well-being (Is 45:7; Ez 34:25-26), absence of conflict (Is 2:2-4; 32:15-20; Ez 34:28-31), right relations (Is 11:1-5; Mi 4:1-4; Zec 8:9-13), restoration of harmony in nature (Is 11:6-9; Ez 47:1-12), and salvation (Is 52:7; 60:17; Ez 34:30-31; 37:26-28) would again return. Often this eschatological (or end-time) expectation of peace in the OT was associated with a messianic figure, as in Isaiah 9:6, where the future Messiah is termed the “Prince of Peace.” Moreover, his reign would be one of “peace” not only for Israel but throughout the whole earth (Zec 9:9-10). The OT ends with this hope of peace still unrealized in its full sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Greek term for “peace” used predominantly in the NT is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eirene<\/span><em>,<\/em> a word expanded from its classical Greek connotation of “rest” to include the various connotations of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> discussed above. As with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eirene<\/span> could be used as a greeting or farewell (as in “peace be with you”—Lk 10:5; Gal 6:16; Jas 2:16; cf. Jn 20:19), or could signify the cessation of conflict (national—Lk 14:32; Acts 12:20; or interpersonal—Rom 14:19; Eph 4:3), or the presence of domestic tranquillity (cf. 1 Cor 7:15).<\/p>\n<p>The chief issue concerns how Jesus incorporated the OT hope for the eschatological peace of God into his ministry. In the “benedictus” of Zechariah (Lk 1:67-79), the coming of Jesus as the Messiah is expected to “guide our feet into the way of peace” (v 79). So also the angelic testimony to the shepherds proclaims Jesus as the bringer of God’s peace to people (2:14). That is, Jesus as the Messiah would usher in God’s reign of peace. Jesus’ self-understanding as expressed in the fourth Gospel corresponds to this association. This long-expected peace of God is Jesus’ farewell gift to the disciples (Jn 14:27); it is given to them when he breathed his Spirit into them (20:19-22).<\/p>\n<p>The nature of this gift of peace brought by Jesus may be easier to explain by stating what it is not. It is not an end to tension or the absence of warfare. It is not domestic tranquillity nor anything like the worldly estimation of peace (Lk 12:51-53; Jn 14:27; 16:32-33). Its presence may, on the contrary, actually disturb existing relations, being a dividing “sword” in familial relations (Mt 10:34-37). Jesus’ gift of peace is, in reality, the character and mood of the new covenant of his blood that reconciles God to people (Rom 5:1; Col 1:20) and forms the basis of subsequent reconciliation between divergent people (Eph 2:14-22).<\/p>\n<p>The early church understood “peace” to be the final, end-time salvation of God given already through Jesus Christ (cf. Phil 4:7-9). This understanding of “peace” altered the content of the common greeting “go in peace” as it was taken up in the Christian community. In Paul’s common “grace and peace” greeting (1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2, etc.; cf. also 1 Pt 1:2; 2 Jn 1:3; Jude 1:2; Rv 1:4), it is no longer a mere wish for peace that Paul extends to his readers but is a reminder of the messianic gifts available in the present time through Christ to the man of faith. In accord with this, Jesus is described as “peace” itself (Eph 2:14), while God, too, because of his act of reconciliation through Christ, is known as a “God of peace” (Phil 4:9; Col 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>This gift of peace or reconciliation with God, made available through Christ, places an ethical demand on the Christian; it calls for the exercises of “peace” (as reconciliation between persons) within the church. Peace, as a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), is to be the goal of the Christian’s dealings with others (Rom 12:18; 14:19; Heb 12:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PEACE Total well-being, prosperity, and security associated with God’s presence among his people. Linked in the OT with the covenant, the presence of peace was conditional, based on Israel’s obedience. In the prophetic writings, true peace is part of the end-time hope of God’s salvation. In the NT, this longed-for peace is understood as having come in Christ and can be experienced by the believers. In the Old Testament Shalom, the most prominent OT term for “peace,” held a wide range of conno...","summary_en":"PEACE Total well-being, prosperity, and security associated with God’s presence among his people. Linked in the OT with the covenant, the presence of peace was conditional, based on Israel’s obedience. In the prophetic writings, true peace is part of the end-time hope of God’s salvation. In the NT, this longed-for peace is understood as having come in Christ and can be experienced by the believers. In the Old Testament Shalom, the most prominent OT term for “peace,” held a wide range of conno...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45464,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:21","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> The armies <em>returned safely,<\/em> indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • <em>no one dared:<\/em> The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> The armies <em>returned safely,<\/em> indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • <em>no one dared:<\/em> The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:21 The armies returned safely, indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • no one dared: The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.","summary_en":"10:21 The armies returned safely, indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • no one dared: The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73090,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:21","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> The armies <em>returned safely,<\/em> indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • <em>no one dared:<\/em> The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> The armies <em>returned safely,<\/em> indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • <em>no one dared:<\/em> The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:21 The armies returned safely, indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • no one dared: The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.","summary_en":"10:21 The armies returned safely, indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • no one dared: The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100716,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:21","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> The armies <em>returned safely,<\/em> indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • <em>no one dared:<\/em> The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> The armies <em>returned safely,<\/em> indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • <em>no one dared:<\/em> The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:21 The armies returned safely, indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • no one dared: The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.","summary_en":"10:21 The armies returned safely, indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • no one dared: The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128342,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:21","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> The armies <em>returned safely,<\/em> indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • <em>no one dared:<\/em> The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:21<\/strong> The armies <em>returned safely,<\/em> indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • <em>no one dared:<\/em> The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:21 The armies returned safely, indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • no one dared: The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.","summary_en":"10:21 The armies returned safely, indicating that Israel suffered few or no casualties in this battle, a sign of God’s presence in the battle. • no one dared: The Canaanites in the south now had firsthand experience that Israel’s powerful God was fighting them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":9103,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Debir (Person)","title_en":"Debir (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>DEBIR (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>One of the kings of Eglon who became an ally of Adoni-zedek, the king of Jerusalem. Debir was executed by Joshua (Jos 10:22-27).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEBIR (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>One of the kings of Eglon who became an ally of Adoni-zedek, the king of Jerusalem. Debir was executed by Joshua (Jos 10:22-27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEBIR (Person) One of the kings of Eglon who became an ally of Adoni-zedek, the king of Jerusalem. Debir was executed by Joshua (Jos 10:22-27).","summary_en":"DEBIR (Person) One of the kings of Eglon who became an ally of Adoni-zedek, the king of Jerusalem. Debir was executed by Joshua (Jos 10:22-27).","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":45465,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:24","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:24<\/strong> Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly <em>put<\/em> their <em>feet on<\/em> defeated <em>kings’ necks<\/em> to symbolize their subjugation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:24<\/strong> Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly <em>put<\/em> their <em>feet on<\/em> defeated <em>kings’ necks<\/em> to symbolize their subjugation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:24 Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly put their feet on defeated kings’ necks to symbolize their subjugation.","summary_en":"10:24 Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly put their feet on defeated kings’ necks to symbolize their subjugation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73091,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:24","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:24<\/strong> Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly <em>put<\/em> their <em>feet on<\/em> defeated <em>kings’ necks<\/em> to symbolize their subjugation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:24<\/strong> Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly <em>put<\/em> their <em>feet on<\/em> defeated <em>kings’ necks<\/em> to symbolize their subjugation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:24 Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly put their feet on defeated kings’ necks to symbolize their subjugation.","summary_en":"10:24 Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly put their feet on defeated kings’ necks to symbolize their subjugation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100717,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:24","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:24<\/strong> Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly <em>put<\/em> their <em>feet on<\/em> defeated <em>kings’ necks<\/em> to symbolize their subjugation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:24<\/strong> Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly <em>put<\/em> their <em>feet on<\/em> defeated <em>kings’ necks<\/em> to symbolize their subjugation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:24 Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly put their feet on defeated kings’ necks to symbolize their subjugation.","summary_en":"10:24 Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly put their feet on defeated kings’ necks to symbolize their subjugation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128343,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:24","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:24<\/strong> Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly <em>put<\/em> their <em>feet on<\/em> defeated <em>kings’ necks<\/em> to symbolize their subjugation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:24<\/strong> Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly <em>put<\/em> their <em>feet on<\/em> defeated <em>kings’ necks<\/em> to symbolize their subjugation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:24 Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly put their feet on defeated kings’ necks to symbolize their subjugation.","summary_en":"10:24 Victorious commanders in the ancient Near East would commonly put their feet on defeated kings’ necks to symbolize their subjugation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":45466,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:25","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:25 Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).","summary_en":"10:25 Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73092,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:25","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:25 Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).","summary_en":"10:25 Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100718,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:25","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:25 Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).","summary_en":"10:25 Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128344,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:25","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:25<\/strong> Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:25 Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).","summary_en":"10:25 Joshua encouraged his men at Makkedah, using the same words God had used to encourage him before Israel crossed the Jordan and again before the battle of Ai (1:9; 8:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":8139,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","title_en":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","content_ro":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","summary_en":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17269,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Impalement","title_en":"Impalement","content_ro":"<h3>IMPALEMENT<\/h3>\n<p>Driving of a pointed stake into a human body. It was apparently practiced in ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, and possibly also in Israel. There are, however, many problems in understanding the exact nature of impalement and what it means in individual OT passages.<\/p>\n<p>It is not always clear from documents written in Greek whether impalement or crucifixion is being described, since the same Greek word could refer to either procedure. (In crucifixion the body is fastened to a stake rather than being punctured by it.) Nor is it always clear whether the impalement is done to a living body or to a corpse. Probably both types of impalement were employed—the former as a method of execution, the latter as a means of exposing the corpse to the elements, beasts, and general disgrace. Furthermore, it is not clear to what extent “hanging” in the OT refers to impalement. Perhaps the fact that it is typically used with the preposition “on” (rather than “from”) indicates that impalement of some kind is intended.<\/p>\n<p>Some light is shed on the nature of impalement through Mesopotamian sources, where it was apparently a means of execution, in one case for a woman who had caused her husband’s death because of another man (<em>Code of Hammurabi<\/em> 153), in another for a woman performing an abortion on herself (<em>Middle Assyrian Laws<\/em> 53). The latter law makes it clear that the woman should be impaled whether or not she lived through the abortion. The claim of Assyrian kings to have hung captives of war on stakes correlates with the portrayal in Assyrian art of battle scenes where impaled bodies can be seen. The stake could be pushed up into the chest, with the body resting facedown, or between the legs, with the body upright.<\/p>\n<p>Darius’s provision in Ezra 6:11 for the punishment of violators of his decree that the temple in Jerusalem be rebuilt may refer to impalement. If the expression “hang on a tree [stake]” (Gn 40:19; Dt 21:22; Jos 8:29; 10:26; Est 2:23) refers to impalement, at least sometimes it is clear that it was a corpse being impaled (Jos 10:26). This interpretation also applies to Deuteronomy 21:22, in which the victim is first put to death and then “hung.” The point of similarity to the crucifixion of Christ (Gal 3:13) is the disgrace involved and not the precise form of treatment. Other possible examples of impalement are found in 2 Samuel 4:12 and 21:6-13.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Criminal Law and Punishment.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>IMPALEMENT<\/h3>\n<p>Driving of a pointed stake into a human body. It was apparently practiced in ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, and possibly also in Israel. There are, however, many problems in understanding the exact nature of impalement and what it means in individual OT passages.<\/p>\n<p>It is not always clear from documents written in Greek whether impalement or crucifixion is being described, since the same Greek word could refer to either procedure. (In crucifixion the body is fastened to a stake rather than being punctured by it.) Nor is it always clear whether the impalement is done to a living body or to a corpse. Probably both types of impalement were employed—the former as a method of execution, the latter as a means of exposing the corpse to the elements, beasts, and general disgrace. Furthermore, it is not clear to what extent “hanging” in the OT refers to impalement. Perhaps the fact that it is typically used with the preposition “on” (rather than “from”) indicates that impalement of some kind is intended.<\/p>\n<p>Some light is shed on the nature of impalement through Mesopotamian sources, where it was apparently a means of execution, in one case for a woman who had caused her husband’s death because of another man (<em>Code of Hammurabi<\/em> 153), in another for a woman performing an abortion on herself (<em>Middle Assyrian Laws<\/em> 53). The latter law makes it clear that the woman should be impaled whether or not she lived through the abortion. The claim of Assyrian kings to have hung captives of war on stakes correlates with the portrayal in Assyrian art of battle scenes where impaled bodies can be seen. The stake could be pushed up into the chest, with the body resting facedown, or between the legs, with the body upright.<\/p>\n<p>Darius’s provision in Ezra 6:11 for the punishment of violators of his decree that the temple in Jerusalem be rebuilt may refer to impalement. If the expression “hang on a tree [stake]” (Gn 40:19; Dt 21:22; Jos 8:29; 10:26; Est 2:23) refers to impalement, at least sometimes it is clear that it was a corpse being impaled (Jos 10:26). This interpretation also applies to Deuteronomy 21:22, in which the victim is first put to death and then “hung.” The point of similarity to the crucifixion of Christ (Gal 3:13) is the disgrace involved and not the precise form of treatment. Other possible examples of impalement are found in 2 Samuel 4:12 and 21:6-13.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Criminal Law and Punishment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"IMPALEMENT Driving of a pointed stake into a human body. It was apparently practiced in ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, and possibly also in Israel. There are, however, many problems in understanding the exact nature of impalement and what it means in individual OT passages. It is not always clear from documents written in Greek whether impalement or crucifixion is being described, since the same Greek word could refer to either procedure. (In crucifixion the body is fastened to a ...","summary_en":"IMPALEMENT Driving of a pointed stake into a human body. It was apparently practiced in ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, and possibly also in Israel. There are, however, many problems in understanding the exact nature of impalement and what it means in individual OT passages. It is not always clear from documents written in Greek whether impalement or crucifixion is being described, since the same Greek word could refer to either procedure. (In crucifixion the body is fastened to a ...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22376,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lachish","title_en":"Lachish","content_ro":"<h3>LACHISH<\/h3>\n<p>Place first mentioned in the Bible in connection with Joshua and the Israelite conquest of Palestine. At that time, its king and army were among the coalition of southern Palestinian towns that faced Joshua at Gibeon. After Joshua’s victory, he executed the king of Lachish and later took the town itself (Jos 10:26, 32). Though David probably brought the town to life again, it gained new significance when King Rehoboam of Judah (c. 920 <span>BC<\/span>) made it one of his fortified cities to protect the realm against Egyptian and Philistine attacks (2 Chr 11:9). About a century later, Amaziah, king of Judah, was killed at Lachish, where he had fled to escape from conspirators (2 Kgs 14:19).<\/p>\n\n<p>Lachish resisted valiantly when Sennacherib of Assyria invaded in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, but it ultimately fell under furious onslaughts (2 Kgs 18:13-17; Is 36). Reoccupied and rebuilt by the Judeans, it was one of the last outposts of Jerusalem to fall to the Babylonians when Nebuchadnezzar invaded in 588–586 <span>BC<\/span> and brought the southern kingdom to an end (Jer 34:7). In addition to biblical references, the Egyptian Amarna letters and Assyrian records allude to Lachish.<\/p>\n<p>The location of Lachish was long debated. Originally, it was placed at Umm Lakis, then in 1891 at Tell el-Hesi, and finally in 1929 at Tell ed-Duweir, 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem and 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) west of Hebron. This last identification has now been confirmed by a variety of indicators.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lachish Letters.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LACHISH<\/h3>\n<p>Place first mentioned in the Bible in connection with Joshua and the Israelite conquest of Palestine. At that time, its king and army were among the coalition of southern Palestinian towns that faced Joshua at Gibeon. After Joshua’s victory, he executed the king of Lachish and later took the town itself (Jos 10:26, 32). Though David probably brought the town to life again, it gained new significance when King Rehoboam of Judah (c. 920 <span>BC<\/span>) made it one of his fortified cities to protect the realm against Egyptian and Philistine attacks (2 Chr 11:9). About a century later, Amaziah, king of Judah, was killed at Lachish, where he had fled to escape from conspirators (2 Kgs 14:19).<\/p>\n\n<p>Lachish resisted valiantly when Sennacherib of Assyria invaded in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, but it ultimately fell under furious onslaughts (2 Kgs 18:13-17; Is 36). Reoccupied and rebuilt by the Judeans, it was one of the last outposts of Jerusalem to fall to the Babylonians when Nebuchadnezzar invaded in 588–586 <span>BC<\/span> and brought the southern kingdom to an end (Jer 34:7). In addition to biblical references, the Egyptian Amarna letters and Assyrian records allude to Lachish.<\/p>\n<p>The location of Lachish was long debated. Originally, it was placed at Umm Lakis, then in 1891 at Tell el-Hesi, and finally in 1929 at Tell ed-Duweir, 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) southwest of Jerusalem and 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) west of Hebron. This last identification has now been confirmed by a variety of indicators.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lachish Letters.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LACHISH Place first mentioned in the Bible in connection with Joshua and the Israelite conquest of Palestine. At that time, its king and army were among the coalition of southern Palestinian towns that faced Joshua at Gibeon. After Joshua’s victory, he executed the king of Lachish and later took the town itself (Jos 10:26, 32). Though David probably brought the town to life again, it gained new significance when King Rehoboam of Judah (c. 920 BC) made it one of his fortified cities to protect...","summary_en":"LACHISH Place first mentioned in the Bible in connection with Joshua and the Israelite conquest of Palestine. At that time, its king and army were among the coalition of southern Palestinian towns that faced Joshua at Gibeon. After Joshua’s victory, he executed the king of Lachish and later took the town itself (Jos 10:26, 32). Though David probably brought the town to life again, it gained new significance when King Rehoboam of Judah (c. 920 BC) made it one of his fortified cities to protect...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45467,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:26","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:26-27<\/strong> Joshua’s execution of the <em>five kings<\/em> followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:26-27<\/strong> Joshua’s execution of the <em>five kings<\/em> followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:26-27 Joshua’s execution of the five kings followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).","summary_en":"10:26-27 Joshua’s execution of the five kings followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73093,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:26","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:26-27<\/strong> Joshua’s execution of the <em>five kings<\/em> followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:26-27<\/strong> Joshua’s execution of the <em>five kings<\/em> followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:26-27 Joshua’s execution of the five kings followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).","summary_en":"10:26-27 Joshua’s execution of the five kings followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100719,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:26","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:26-27<\/strong> Joshua’s execution of the <em>five kings<\/em> followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:26-27<\/strong> Joshua’s execution of the <em>five kings<\/em> followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:26-27 Joshua’s execution of the five kings followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).","summary_en":"10:26-27 Joshua’s execution of the five kings followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128345,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:26","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:26-27<\/strong> Joshua’s execution of the <em>five kings<\/em> followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:26-27<\/strong> Joshua’s execution of the <em>five kings<\/em> followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:26-27 Joshua’s execution of the five kings followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).","summary_en":"10:26-27 Joshua’s execution of the five kings followed the pattern established with the king of Ai (see note on 8:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":2738,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Armor and Weapons","title_en":"Armor and Weapons","content_ro":"<h3>ARMOR AND WEAPONS<\/h3>\n<p>The location of Palestine at the crossroads of three continents gave it a strategic importance in the ancient world quite out of proportion to its size. Surrounded by the great military powers (Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Hittites of Anatolia), that stretch of land was constantly the object of aggressive ambitions of other nations. The invention of different weapons, fortifications, and tactics exerted a profound reciprocal influence on other inventions. Tactical innovation by one side prompted new countertactics by the other.<\/p>\n<p>The three basic elements of the art of warfare are mobility, firepower, and security. Weapons alone seldom determined the issue of battle, particularly when both sides were evenly matched. The skill with which strategy and tactics were deployed, the spirit of the commander in directing his troops, and the precision with which the troops handled their weapons were decisive factors in many of the battles mentioned in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AttackWeapons\">Attack Weapons<\/p>\n<p>The armory of a military commander in antiquity consisted of a variety of offensive weapons designed to engage the enemy at long, medium, and short range. The bow and the sling were the principal weapons developed for long-range firepower; the javelin and the spear for medium-range; the sword, the ax, and the mace for short-range.<\/p>\n<h5>Bow<\/h5>\n<p>Early bows were fashioned from one piece of seasoned wood. No single type of bow wood, however, could provide the lightness, toughness, and elasticity required. Gradually the idea was conceived of combining several natural materials—wood, sections of animal horn, animal tendons and sinews, and glue—in the construction of a bow to meet all the demands placed on it. The resulting composite bow became a weapon of supreme importance. Composite structure gave a bow lightness, strength, and elasticity. Use of a double-convex form gave increased range and power of penetration.<\/p>\n<p>The bowstring was made from bindweed, natural cord, hide, or the intestines of oxen or camels. The bow was strung by hand (2 Kgs 13:16), usually bending it with the foot, which required considerable strength (cf. 2 Sm 22:35; Jer 51:3). That may explain why archers were known as “bow treaders” or as “those who tread a bow.”<\/p>\n<p>The form of the arrowhead was a response to the enemy’s defense and armor. In the late Bronze period, for example, a battle arrowhead was generally of bronze and was thick in the middle, tapering to a spine. Its shape was dictated by the fact that the coats of mail in widespread use at the time could be penetrated only by a spined or ribbed arrowhead. The arrow shaft was usually made from reed, a material that combined strength with pliability.<\/p>\n<h5>Sling<\/h5>\n<p>Complementing the bow was the sling, devised originally by shepherds to drive off animals molesting their flocks (cf. 1 Sm 17:40). It gradually assumed importance as a weapon of war, its supreme advantage being simple construction. Not only did a sling require little technical skill to produce, but the stones used as projectiles were readily available on the ground. In the hands of a trained slinger a missile could be hurled as far as 600 feet (183 meters) in any terrain. The sling’s capacity for high-angled fire up a steep slope was particularly important in an assault on a fortified city. Its principal disadvantage was that strenuous training and experience were required to achieve accuracy in its operation (cf. Jgs 20:16).<\/p>\n<p>A sling was commonly made from two leather thongs to which were attached a pocket for holding the stone. With the thongs pulled taut the pocket became a bag. The slinger held his arms above his head, the bag in his left hand and the ends of the taut thongs in his right hand. After swinging the sling several times around his head with great force to give it momentum, he suddenly released the end of one of the thongs to discharge the missile. Lead pellets as well as smooth stones were used as projectiles. They were carried in a bag or were piled conveniently at the slinger’s feet.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the sling as a long-range weapon is evident in the familiar account of David’s encounter with the Philistine champion, Goliath of Gath (1 Sm 17:40-51). At that time the Philistines possessed many advanced types of weapons, but the bow and sling were not among them. They depended on medium-range weapons like the javelin and short-range weapons like the sword (cf. 1 Sm 17:4-7, 45, 51). The sling gave David an advantage in range that was decisive against Goliath’s superior weapons and armor (1 Sm 17:48-49).<\/p>\n<h5>Javelin and Spear<\/h5>\n<p>Two weapons employed for medium-distance warfare were similar in appearance but different in length and operation. The javelin, generally lighter and shorter than the spear, was designed for throwing. It was like a large arrow that was hurled by the hand. Sumerian charioteers of the third millennium <span>BC<\/span> were armed with several javelins, carried like arrows in a quiver attached to the body of the chariot. Javelin heads were designed for penetration and altered in shape and material as enemy armor became more effective. A head fashioned with sharp hooks or barbs was difficult and painful to extract from a wound.<\/p>\n<p>The spear was similar in appearance to the javelin but was larger, heavier, and designed primarily as a thrusting weapon (cf. Nm 25:7-8). The oldest military monuments known indicate that the spear was already well developed. On the Egyptian hunter’s slate palette and on the black granite stele from Warka (c. 3000 <span>BC<\/span>), the warrior’s personal weapon is a long staff tipped with a leaf-shaped blade with a sharp spine. Throughout the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>, the spear was standard equipment for heavy-armed infantry and the most effective weapon for both chariot and infantry charges. Excavations have shown that the spear was the common weapon of the seminomadic tribes who began pouring into Palestine from the north in the middle Bronze Age.<\/p>\n<p>Another characteristic of spears in that early period was a metal tip attached to the butt of the shaft, enabling a spear to be stuck upright in the ground when not in use. That feature persisted into later periods and is mentioned specifically in reference to Saul’s spear, which was stuck in the ground by his head while he slept (1 Sm 26:7). Occasionally the metal tip functioned as a thrusting weapon in its own right, as is evident in the account of the slaying of Asahel (2 Sm 2:23).<\/p>\n<h5>Sword<\/h5>\n<p>One of the earliest objects made of iron was the sword. Swords were designed for either stabbing or striking. The stabbing sword developed as a long straight blade, tapered toward the point for piercing the body. Its tapered edges were sharpened so that it could also serve as a cutting instrument. The striking sword, on the other hand, had only one sharp edge, with the thickest part of the blade not along the center but along its blunt edge. Such a sword was often curved, sometimes to a degree that gave it the appearance of a sickle, but with the outer, convex edge sharpened as the cutting blade. The earliest type of sickle sword appeared in the second half of the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Both the hilt, or handle, and the blade were fashioned from a single bar of metal. In the middle Bronze Age the curved striking sword functioned essentially as an ax, with a comparatively long hilt and short blade.<\/p>\n<p>That type of sword completely disappeared in the late Bronze Age because it proved ineffective against the widespread use of the helmet and armor. In its place appeared a new design with the curved blade equal in length to the hilt and sometimes longer. It provided a cutting weapon in chariot fighting and against an enemy who possessed no armor. Widespread use of such long-bladed swords at that time explains the phrase repeatedly used in the Bible to describe Joshua’s conquests of the Canaanites: Joshua smote them with the edge of the sword (e.g., Jos 8:24; 10:28-39). That expression would be inappropriate for the action of a short, straight, narrow sword designed as a thrusting weapon. A fine specimen of curved sword was found at Gezer in Palestine in the tomb of a nobleman, dating to the first half of the 14th century <span>BC<\/span>. The same type of blade is also depicted on a late 13th century <span>BC<\/span> ivory carving from Megiddo.<\/p>\n<p>During those centuries advances made in the technology of forging iron were reflected in the development of the straight sword as well. The Sea Peoples, among whom were the Philistines, specialized in short-range arms. As early as the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> they began to make the straight blade more effective than the curved sickle-type sword.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of Saul, the Philistines had used their technology to establish themselves as city dwellers and the dominant military presence in the land. Their military superiority was based on the chariot and on an infantry equipped with personal armaments of high quality. They carefully retained the forging of hard metal under their own supervision and kept the Israelites from developing forges of their own (cf. 1 Sm 13:19-22). Not until that situation was altered could the balance of power pass from the Philistines to Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Mace and Ax<\/h5>\n<p>The mace and the ax, developed as alternatives to the sword before hard metal could be forged, were designed for hand-to-hand fighting. They consisted of a comparatively short wooden handle, one end of which was fitted with a lethal head made of stone or metal. The weapons were swung like a hammer to deliver a striking blow. The critical detail was the secure fastening of the head to the handle to prevent its flying off when swung or breaking off when struck. The handle of both the mace and the ax was widened at the point of the grip, tapering toward the head, to prevent the weapon from slipping from the hand when swung. Such weapons were carried in the hand or attached to the wrist with a loop. The mace was designed to batter and smash, the ax to pierce and cut.<\/p>\n<p>The mace was a very primitive weapon. The hieroglyphic sign for the infinitive <em>to fight<\/em> represents hands holding a mace and a medium-size shield. During the Chalcolithic and the first half of the early Bronze periods (3500–2500 <span>BC<\/span>), the mace was the primary weapon for personal combat. Because the helmet had not yet made its appearance, the striking power of the mace was devastating. Long after the mace had become obsolete as a personal weapon, it continued to serve as a symbol of sovereign authority for the king or deity (cf. Ps 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Complex technical problems taxed the ingenuity of armorers in the production of the ax. The blade had to be fixed securely to the handle. The cutting ax had a short blade and a wide edge. It was an effective weapon against an enemy unprotected by armor. It was also used for tearing down the wall of a besieged city, as in the wall painting at Saqqarah (23d century <span>BC<\/span>). But against armor the cutting ax was ineffective. Deeper power of penetration was achieved with the piercing ax, which had a long, narrow blade ending in a short, sharp edge.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefensiveProtection\">Defensive Protection<\/p>\n<p>Without provision for personal protection of the individual soldier on the battlefield, the mobility and firepower of an army could be seriously compromised.<\/p>\n<h5>Shield<\/h5>\n<p>Designed to provide a barrier between the body of a soldier and the weapon of his foe, the shield was one of the oldest means of security devised. In the time of the judges and the early Israelite kings, persons of rank were frequently protected by a very large shield. It was carried by a special shield bearer who remained constantly at the unprotected right side of the warrior to whom he was assigned as a bodyguard (cf. Jgs 9:54; 1 Sm 14:1; 17:7; 2 Sm 18:15). The right side of an armed combatant was unprotected because he carried his weapons in his right hand and his shield in his left. The shield bearer therefore had to stand by his master’s vulnerable right side to protect him (1 Sm 17:41; cf. Ps 16:8). In that period the shield was ordinarily anointed as part of the consecration of an Israelite warrior and his weapons for battle (cf. 2 Sm 1:21).<\/p>\n<h5>Armor<\/h5>\n<p>Personal armor protected the body of a combatant from injury while freeing his hands to use his weapons. The earliest type of body armor formed a substitute for the long shield. It consisted of a full-length tunic made from leather or some tough fiber. It was relatively simple to produce, was light enough to permit full mobility, and offered a measure of protection to the chest, abdomen, back, thighs, and legs. So equipped, a soldier required only a short shield to protect his arms and face.<\/p>\n<p>The late Bronze period saw the development of the coat of mail. It consisted of hundreds of small pieces of overlapping metal joined together like fish scales and sewed to the surface of a cloth or leather tunic. Written documents from Nuzi state that from 400 to 600 large scales and several hundred smaller scales went into the production of a single coat. Smaller scales and narrower rows were used where greater flexibility was needed, as at the throat and neck. The resulting garment was relatively flexible, affording freedom of movement, while the hard metal scales gave far greater personal protection than leather or fiber could provide.<\/p>\n<h5>Helmet<\/h5>\n<p>Since the greatest point of vulnerability for a soldier in combat was his head, concern for some form of protective helmet can be traced as far back as the end of the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Bronze helmets were worn both by Goliath and by Saul (1 Sm 17:5, 38). Although the helmet was standard equipment for the heavily armed infantry of foreign armies for centuries, it does not seem to have been a common possession of soldiers in the Israelite army during the period of the united monarchy. Among military reforms introduced by King Uzziah in the ninth century <span>BC<\/span> was provision of helmets for the army of the southern kingdom of Judah (2 Chr 26:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ARMOR AND WEAPONS<\/h3>\n<p>The location of Palestine at the crossroads of three continents gave it a strategic importance in the ancient world quite out of proportion to its size. Surrounded by the great military powers (Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Hittites of Anatolia), that stretch of land was constantly the object of aggressive ambitions of other nations. The invention of different weapons, fortifications, and tactics exerted a profound reciprocal influence on other inventions. Tactical innovation by one side prompted new countertactics by the other.<\/p>\n<p>The three basic elements of the art of warfare are mobility, firepower, and security. Weapons alone seldom determined the issue of battle, particularly when both sides were evenly matched. The skill with which strategy and tactics were deployed, the spirit of the commander in directing his troops, and the precision with which the troops handled their weapons were decisive factors in many of the battles mentioned in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AttackWeapons\">Attack Weapons<\/p>\n<p>The armory of a military commander in antiquity consisted of a variety of offensive weapons designed to engage the enemy at long, medium, and short range. The bow and the sling were the principal weapons developed for long-range firepower; the javelin and the spear for medium-range; the sword, the ax, and the mace for short-range.<\/p>\n<h5>Bow<\/h5>\n<p>Early bows were fashioned from one piece of seasoned wood. No single type of bow wood, however, could provide the lightness, toughness, and elasticity required. Gradually the idea was conceived of combining several natural materials—wood, sections of animal horn, animal tendons and sinews, and glue—in the construction of a bow to meet all the demands placed on it. The resulting composite bow became a weapon of supreme importance. Composite structure gave a bow lightness, strength, and elasticity. Use of a double-convex form gave increased range and power of penetration.<\/p>\n<p>The bowstring was made from bindweed, natural cord, hide, or the intestines of oxen or camels. The bow was strung by hand (2 Kgs 13:16), usually bending it with the foot, which required considerable strength (cf. 2 Sm 22:35; Jer 51:3). That may explain why archers were known as “bow treaders” or as “those who tread a bow.”<\/p>\n<p>The form of the arrowhead was a response to the enemy’s defense and armor. In the late Bronze period, for example, a battle arrowhead was generally of bronze and was thick in the middle, tapering to a spine. Its shape was dictated by the fact that the coats of mail in widespread use at the time could be penetrated only by a spined or ribbed arrowhead. The arrow shaft was usually made from reed, a material that combined strength with pliability.<\/p>\n<h5>Sling<\/h5>\n<p>Complementing the bow was the sling, devised originally by shepherds to drive off animals molesting their flocks (cf. 1 Sm 17:40). It gradually assumed importance as a weapon of war, its supreme advantage being simple construction. Not only did a sling require little technical skill to produce, but the stones used as projectiles were readily available on the ground. In the hands of a trained slinger a missile could be hurled as far as 600 feet (183 meters) in any terrain. The sling’s capacity for high-angled fire up a steep slope was particularly important in an assault on a fortified city. Its principal disadvantage was that strenuous training and experience were required to achieve accuracy in its operation (cf. Jgs 20:16).<\/p>\n<p>A sling was commonly made from two leather thongs to which were attached a pocket for holding the stone. With the thongs pulled taut the pocket became a bag. The slinger held his arms above his head, the bag in his left hand and the ends of the taut thongs in his right hand. After swinging the sling several times around his head with great force to give it momentum, he suddenly released the end of one of the thongs to discharge the missile. Lead pellets as well as smooth stones were used as projectiles. They were carried in a bag or were piled conveniently at the slinger’s feet.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the sling as a long-range weapon is evident in the familiar account of David’s encounter with the Philistine champion, Goliath of Gath (1 Sm 17:40-51). At that time the Philistines possessed many advanced types of weapons, but the bow and sling were not among them. They depended on medium-range weapons like the javelin and short-range weapons like the sword (cf. 1 Sm 17:4-7, 45, 51). The sling gave David an advantage in range that was decisive against Goliath’s superior weapons and armor (1 Sm 17:48-49).<\/p>\n<h5>Javelin and Spear<\/h5>\n<p>Two weapons employed for medium-distance warfare were similar in appearance but different in length and operation. The javelin, generally lighter and shorter than the spear, was designed for throwing. It was like a large arrow that was hurled by the hand. Sumerian charioteers of the third millennium <span>BC<\/span> were armed with several javelins, carried like arrows in a quiver attached to the body of the chariot. Javelin heads were designed for penetration and altered in shape and material as enemy armor became more effective. A head fashioned with sharp hooks or barbs was difficult and painful to extract from a wound.<\/p>\n<p>The spear was similar in appearance to the javelin but was larger, heavier, and designed primarily as a thrusting weapon (cf. Nm 25:7-8). The oldest military monuments known indicate that the spear was already well developed. On the Egyptian hunter’s slate palette and on the black granite stele from Warka (c. 3000 <span>BC<\/span>), the warrior’s personal weapon is a long staff tipped with a leaf-shaped blade with a sharp spine. Throughout the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>, the spear was standard equipment for heavy-armed infantry and the most effective weapon for both chariot and infantry charges. Excavations have shown that the spear was the common weapon of the seminomadic tribes who began pouring into Palestine from the north in the middle Bronze Age.<\/p>\n<p>Another characteristic of spears in that early period was a metal tip attached to the butt of the shaft, enabling a spear to be stuck upright in the ground when not in use. That feature persisted into later periods and is mentioned specifically in reference to Saul’s spear, which was stuck in the ground by his head while he slept (1 Sm 26:7). Occasionally the metal tip functioned as a thrusting weapon in its own right, as is evident in the account of the slaying of Asahel (2 Sm 2:23).<\/p>\n<h5>Sword<\/h5>\n<p>One of the earliest objects made of iron was the sword. Swords were designed for either stabbing or striking. The stabbing sword developed as a long straight blade, tapered toward the point for piercing the body. Its tapered edges were sharpened so that it could also serve as a cutting instrument. The striking sword, on the other hand, had only one sharp edge, with the thickest part of the blade not along the center but along its blunt edge. Such a sword was often curved, sometimes to a degree that gave it the appearance of a sickle, but with the outer, convex edge sharpened as the cutting blade. The earliest type of sickle sword appeared in the second half of the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Both the hilt, or handle, and the blade were fashioned from a single bar of metal. In the middle Bronze Age the curved striking sword functioned essentially as an ax, with a comparatively long hilt and short blade.<\/p>\n<p>That type of sword completely disappeared in the late Bronze Age because it proved ineffective against the widespread use of the helmet and armor. In its place appeared a new design with the curved blade equal in length to the hilt and sometimes longer. It provided a cutting weapon in chariot fighting and against an enemy who possessed no armor. Widespread use of such long-bladed swords at that time explains the phrase repeatedly used in the Bible to describe Joshua’s conquests of the Canaanites: Joshua smote them with the edge of the sword (e.g., Jos 8:24; 10:28-39). That expression would be inappropriate for the action of a short, straight, narrow sword designed as a thrusting weapon. A fine specimen of curved sword was found at Gezer in Palestine in the tomb of a nobleman, dating to the first half of the 14th century <span>BC<\/span>. The same type of blade is also depicted on a late 13th century <span>BC<\/span> ivory carving from Megiddo.<\/p>\n<p>During those centuries advances made in the technology of forging iron were reflected in the development of the straight sword as well. The Sea Peoples, among whom were the Philistines, specialized in short-range arms. As early as the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> they began to make the straight blade more effective than the curved sickle-type sword.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of Saul, the Philistines had used their technology to establish themselves as city dwellers and the dominant military presence in the land. Their military superiority was based on the chariot and on an infantry equipped with personal armaments of high quality. They carefully retained the forging of hard metal under their own supervision and kept the Israelites from developing forges of their own (cf. 1 Sm 13:19-22). Not until that situation was altered could the balance of power pass from the Philistines to Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Mace and Ax<\/h5>\n<p>The mace and the ax, developed as alternatives to the sword before hard metal could be forged, were designed for hand-to-hand fighting. They consisted of a comparatively short wooden handle, one end of which was fitted with a lethal head made of stone or metal. The weapons were swung like a hammer to deliver a striking blow. The critical detail was the secure fastening of the head to the handle to prevent its flying off when swung or breaking off when struck. The handle of both the mace and the ax was widened at the point of the grip, tapering toward the head, to prevent the weapon from slipping from the hand when swung. Such weapons were carried in the hand or attached to the wrist with a loop. The mace was designed to batter and smash, the ax to pierce and cut.<\/p>\n<p>The mace was a very primitive weapon. The hieroglyphic sign for the infinitive <em>to fight<\/em> represents hands holding a mace and a medium-size shield. During the Chalcolithic and the first half of the early Bronze periods (3500–2500 <span>BC<\/span>), the mace was the primary weapon for personal combat. Because the helmet had not yet made its appearance, the striking power of the mace was devastating. Long after the mace had become obsolete as a personal weapon, it continued to serve as a symbol of sovereign authority for the king or deity (cf. Ps 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Complex technical problems taxed the ingenuity of armorers in the production of the ax. The blade had to be fixed securely to the handle. The cutting ax had a short blade and a wide edge. It was an effective weapon against an enemy unprotected by armor. It was also used for tearing down the wall of a besieged city, as in the wall painting at Saqqarah (23d century <span>BC<\/span>). But against armor the cutting ax was ineffective. Deeper power of penetration was achieved with the piercing ax, which had a long, narrow blade ending in a short, sharp edge.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefensiveProtection\">Defensive Protection<\/p>\n<p>Without provision for personal protection of the individual soldier on the battlefield, the mobility and firepower of an army could be seriously compromised.<\/p>\n<h5>Shield<\/h5>\n<p>Designed to provide a barrier between the body of a soldier and the weapon of his foe, the shield was one of the oldest means of security devised. In the time of the judges and the early Israelite kings, persons of rank were frequently protected by a very large shield. It was carried by a special shield bearer who remained constantly at the unprotected right side of the warrior to whom he was assigned as a bodyguard (cf. Jgs 9:54; 1 Sm 14:1; 17:7; 2 Sm 18:15). The right side of an armed combatant was unprotected because he carried his weapons in his right hand and his shield in his left. The shield bearer therefore had to stand by his master’s vulnerable right side to protect him (1 Sm 17:41; cf. Ps 16:8). In that period the shield was ordinarily anointed as part of the consecration of an Israelite warrior and his weapons for battle (cf. 2 Sm 1:21).<\/p>\n<h5>Armor<\/h5>\n<p>Personal armor protected the body of a combatant from injury while freeing his hands to use his weapons. The earliest type of body armor formed a substitute for the long shield. It consisted of a full-length tunic made from leather or some tough fiber. It was relatively simple to produce, was light enough to permit full mobility, and offered a measure of protection to the chest, abdomen, back, thighs, and legs. So equipped, a soldier required only a short shield to protect his arms and face.<\/p>\n<p>The late Bronze period saw the development of the coat of mail. It consisted of hundreds of small pieces of overlapping metal joined together like fish scales and sewed to the surface of a cloth or leather tunic. Written documents from Nuzi state that from 400 to 600 large scales and several hundred smaller scales went into the production of a single coat. Smaller scales and narrower rows were used where greater flexibility was needed, as at the throat and neck. The resulting garment was relatively flexible, affording freedom of movement, while the hard metal scales gave far greater personal protection than leather or fiber could provide.<\/p>\n<h5>Helmet<\/h5>\n<p>Since the greatest point of vulnerability for a soldier in combat was his head, concern for some form of protective helmet can be traced as far back as the end of the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Bronze helmets were worn both by Goliath and by Saul (1 Sm 17:5, 38). Although the helmet was standard equipment for the heavily armed infantry of foreign armies for centuries, it does not seem to have been a common possession of soldiers in the Israelite army during the period of the united monarchy. Among military reforms introduced by King Uzziah in the ninth century <span>BC<\/span> was provision of helmets for the army of the southern kingdom of Judah (2 Chr 26:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ARMOR AND WEAPONS The location of Palestine at the crossroads of three continents gave it a strategic importance in the ancient world quite out of proportion to its size. Surrounded by the great military powers (Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Hittites of Anatolia), that stretch of land was constantly the object of aggressive ambitions of other nations. The invention of different weapons, fortifications, and tactics exerted a profound reciprocal influence on other inventions. Tactical innovation by o...","summary_en":"ARMOR AND WEAPONS The location of Palestine at the crossroads of three continents gave it a strategic importance in the ancient world quite out of proportion to its size. Surrounded by the great military powers (Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Hittites of Anatolia), that stretch of land was constantly the object of aggressive ambitions of other nations. The invention of different weapons, fortifications, and tactics exerted a profound reciprocal influence on other inventions. Tactical innovation by o...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20633,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joshua (Person)","title_en":"Joshua (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, <span>kjv<\/span> “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17).<\/li>\n<p>Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is My Banner” (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land of Canaan, Joshua represented the tribe of Ephraim (Nm 13:8). At that time Joshua was called Hoshea, but Moses changed his name to Joshua (vv 8, 16). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies to bring back an affirmative report concerning an Israelite invasion of the land (14:6-9). Consequently, of all the adult Israelite males to leave Egypt in the exodus, only these two crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord announced to Moses his impending death, Moses asked about his successor, and the Lord appointed Joshua to that position (Nm 27:12-23). After the death of Moses on Mt Nebo, Joshua’s leadership was confirmed (34:17), and the Lord told Joshua to go over the Jordan and take the land (Jos 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>From the Transjordan, Joshua sent two men across the river to reconnoiter Jericho (ch 2). In Jericho they were concealed by Rahab and later safely made their way back to Joshua to report that the people of the land were fainthearted because of the Israelites (vv 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>When Israel had crossed the river, the Lord instructed Joshua to set up a circle of 12 stones at Gilgal to commemorate this passage (Jos 4:1-7). The Lord then commanded all of the males who had been born during the exodus to be circumcised (5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>While camped at Gilgal, near Jericho, Joshua was confronted by a man with a drawn sword. When Joshua challenged the man, he learned that it was the Lord, who told him to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy (Jos 5:13-15). The Lord gave Joshua directions for the destruction of Jericho; these were followed explicitly and the city fell (ch 6). The attack on Ai ended in temporary defeat, until the matter of Achan’s sin was discovered and judged (7:10-26). Then Ai was taken and destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-32), and the blessings and curses were read, as commanded by God through Moses (Jos 8:33-35; cf. Dt 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Because the Israelites failed to ask direction from the Lord (Jos 9:14), Joshua was tricked into making a covenant of peace with the Hivites of Gibeon. Joshua then reduced them to doing menial tasks in Israel (vv 21-27).<\/p>\n<p>The kings of the various Canaanite cities allied themselves against the Israelite threat (Jos 9:1-2) and a league of five Amorite cities (Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon) attacked Gibeon (10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua for help; he responded quickly against this Amorite confederation and routed the Amorite forces. It was on this occasion that Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand still so that Israel could have more time to defeat these adversaries (vv 12-14). This victory was followed by a series of successful attacks on enemy towns (vv 28-43).<\/p>\n<p>A northern alliance headed by Jabin, king of Hazor, was the next opposition (Jos 11:1-5). The Lord assured Joshua of success, and the city of Hazor was taken and destroyed by fire (vv 6-15). Joshua 11:23 summarizes the conquest of the land, and chapter 12 enumerates the kings who were conquered.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was now old, and the Lord told him that much land remained to be possessed. These territories are listed, but the Lord directed Joshua to proceed with the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes (Jos 13:7; cf. 13:8–18:28). Joshua himself was given the city he asked for, Timnath-serah, in the hill country of Ephraim, which he rebuilt and settled (19:49-50).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord told Joshua to appoint cities of refuge to which a person guilty of manslaughter could flee to escape the avenger of blood (Jos 20). Then the Levites came to Eleazar the priest and Joshua to request that they be given their cities, as the Lord had commanded through Moses (21:1-42).<\/p>\n\n<p>In his advanced years Joshua summoned all Israel and solemnly charged them to continue in faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 23). Finally, he called all Israel to Shechem, where he gave them his farewell message. He summed up the Lord’s dealings with them from the time of Abraham and again challenged them to serve the Lord, putting before them the well-known choice and decision: “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died at the age of 110 years and was buried in the land of his inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:29-30; the parallel account in Jgs 2:8-9 reads “Timnath-heres,” <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Israel served the Lord during all the days of Joshua and the elders who outlived him (Jos 24:31; Jgs 2:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Inhabitant of Beth-shemesh. It was his grainfield into which the cart carrying the ark sent by the Philistines came. It stopped by a large stone which was then used to commemorate this event (1 Sm 6:14, 18).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Jerusalem during King Josiah’s reign (2 Kgs 23:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Jozadak’s son and high priest during the days of Zerubbabel in postexilic Jerusalem (Hg 1:1-14; 2:2-4; Zec 3:1-9; 6:11; <span>nlt<\/span> “Jeshua”). Joshua is alternately called Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. <em>See<\/em> Jeshua (Person) #3.<\/li>\n<li>5. Eliezer’s son and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, <span>kjv<\/span> “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17).<\/li>\n<p>Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is My Banner” (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land of Canaan, Joshua represented the tribe of Ephraim (Nm 13:8). At that time Joshua was called Hoshea, but Moses changed his name to Joshua (vv 8, 16). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies to bring back an affirmative report concerning an Israelite invasion of the land (14:6-9). Consequently, of all the adult Israelite males to leave Egypt in the exodus, only these two crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Lord announced to Moses his impending death, Moses asked about his successor, and the Lord appointed Joshua to that position (Nm 27:12-23). After the death of Moses on Mt Nebo, Joshua’s leadership was confirmed (34:17), and the Lord told Joshua to go over the Jordan and take the land (Jos 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>From the Transjordan, Joshua sent two men across the river to reconnoiter Jericho (ch 2). In Jericho they were concealed by Rahab and later safely made their way back to Joshua to report that the people of the land were fainthearted because of the Israelites (vv 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>When Israel had crossed the river, the Lord instructed Joshua to set up a circle of 12 stones at Gilgal to commemorate this passage (Jos 4:1-7). The Lord then commanded all of the males who had been born during the exodus to be circumcised (5:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>While camped at Gilgal, near Jericho, Joshua was confronted by a man with a drawn sword. When Joshua challenged the man, he learned that it was the Lord, who told him to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy (Jos 5:13-15). The Lord gave Joshua directions for the destruction of Jericho; these were followed explicitly and the city fell (ch 6). The attack on Ai ended in temporary defeat, until the matter of Achan’s sin was discovered and judged (7:10-26). Then Ai was taken and destroyed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-32), and the blessings and curses were read, as commanded by God through Moses (Jos 8:33-35; cf. Dt 27–28).<\/p>\n<p>Because the Israelites failed to ask direction from the Lord (Jos 9:14), Joshua was tricked into making a covenant of peace with the Hivites of Gibeon. Joshua then reduced them to doing menial tasks in Israel (vv 21-27).<\/p>\n<p>The kings of the various Canaanite cities allied themselves against the Israelite threat (Jos 9:1-2) and a league of five Amorite cities (Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon) attacked Gibeon (10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Joshua for help; he responded quickly against this Amorite confederation and routed the Amorite forces. It was on this occasion that Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand still so that Israel could have more time to defeat these adversaries (vv 12-14). This victory was followed by a series of successful attacks on enemy towns (vv 28-43).<\/p>\n<p>A northern alliance headed by Jabin, king of Hazor, was the next opposition (Jos 11:1-5). The Lord assured Joshua of success, and the city of Hazor was taken and destroyed by fire (vv 6-15). Joshua 11:23 summarizes the conquest of the land, and chapter 12 enumerates the kings who were conquered.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua was now old, and the Lord told him that much land remained to be possessed. These territories are listed, but the Lord directed Joshua to proceed with the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes (Jos 13:7; cf. 13:8–18:28). Joshua himself was given the city he asked for, Timnath-serah, in the hill country of Ephraim, which he rebuilt and settled (19:49-50).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord told Joshua to appoint cities of refuge to which a person guilty of manslaughter could flee to escape the avenger of blood (Jos 20). Then the Levites came to Eleazar the priest and Joshua to request that they be given their cities, as the Lord had commanded through Moses (21:1-42).<\/p>\n\n<p>In his advanced years Joshua summoned all Israel and solemnly charged them to continue in faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 23). Finally, he called all Israel to Shechem, where he gave them his farewell message. He summed up the Lord’s dealings with them from the time of Abraham and again challenged them to serve the Lord, putting before them the well-known choice and decision: “Choose today whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my family, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Joshua died at the age of 110 years and was buried in the land of his inheritance at Timnath-serah (Jos 24:29-30; the parallel account in Jgs 2:8-9 reads “Timnath-heres,” <span>nlt<\/span> mg). Israel served the Lord during all the days of Joshua and the elders who outlived him (Jos 24:31; Jgs 2:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua, Book of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Inhabitant of Beth-shemesh. It was his grainfield into which the cart carrying the ark sent by the Philistines came. It stopped by a large stone which was then used to commemorate this event (1 Sm 6:14, 18).<\/li>\n<li>3. Governor of Jerusalem during King Josiah’s reign (2 Kgs 23:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Jozadak’s son and high priest during the days of Zerubbabel in postexilic Jerusalem (Hg 1:1-14; 2:2-4; Zec 3:1-9; 6:11; <span>nlt<\/span> “Jeshua”). Joshua is alternately called Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. <em>See<\/em> Jeshua (Person) #3.<\/li>\n<li>5. Eliezer’s son and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA (Person) 1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, kjv “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17). Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The Lord Is My Banner” (v 15). When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA (Person) 1. Son of Nun, Moses’ assistant and successor, and the military leader whom God chose to lead the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan (Nm 13:16, kjv “Jehoshua”; also spelled “Jehoshuah” in 1 Chr 7:27 and “Jeshua” in Neh 8:17). Early in the exodus, Joshua was sent by Moses to fight against the Amalekites (Ex 17:8-15). Joshua defeated Amalek, and Moses wrote of the event and built an altar that he called “The Lord Is My Banner” (v 15). When Moses sent 12 men from Kadesh-barnea ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45468,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28-39<\/strong> Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28-39<\/strong> Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28-39 Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).","summary_en":"10:28-39 Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45469,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>He destroyed them all:<\/em> See study note on 2:9-10.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>He destroyed them all:<\/em> See study note on 2:9-10.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28 He destroyed them all: See study note on 2:9-10.","summary_en":"10:28 He destroyed them all: See study note on 2:9-10.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73094,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28-39<\/strong> Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28-39<\/strong> Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28-39 Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).","summary_en":"10:28-39 Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73095,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>He destroyed them all:<\/em> See study note on 2:9-10.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>He destroyed them all:<\/em> See study note on 2:9-10.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28 He destroyed them all: See study note on 2:9-10.","summary_en":"10:28 He destroyed them all: See study note on 2:9-10.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100720,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28-39<\/strong> Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28-39<\/strong> Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28-39 Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).","summary_en":"10:28-39 Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100721,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>He destroyed them all:<\/em> See study note on 2:9-10.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>He destroyed them all:<\/em> See study note on 2:9-10.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28 He destroyed them all: See study note on 2:9-10.","summary_en":"10:28 He destroyed them all: See study note on 2:9-10.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128346,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28-39<\/strong> Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28-39<\/strong> Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28-39 Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).","summary_en":"10:28-39 Joshua led the Israelites throughout southern Canaan, where they captured but did not burn a number of important cities. God had promised that Israel would dwell in cities they had not built (Deut 6:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128347,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:28","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>He destroyed them all:<\/em> See study note on 2:9-10.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:28<\/strong> <em>He destroyed them all:<\/em> See study note on 2:9-10.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:28 He destroyed them all: See study note on 2:9-10.","summary_en":"10:28 He destroyed them all: See study note on 2:9-10.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":20784,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23144,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Libnah","title_en":"Libnah","content_ro":"<h3>LIBNAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. One of the stations at which the Israelites encamped during the wilderness journey. It was situated between Rimmon-perez and Rissah (Nm 33:20-21). <em>See<\/em> Wilderness Wanderings.<\/li>\n<li>2. Canaanite city-state in southern Palestine, conquered and destroyed by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:29-31; 12:15). It was located within Judah’s territory (15:42) and later given to the Levites for an inheritance (Jos 21:13; 1 Chr 6:57).<\/li>\n<p>Three details in the city’s subsequent history are noted in Scripture: (1) During the reign of King Jehoram of Judah, at the time of Edom’s uprising, Libnah joined in the revolt but was subdued (2 Kgs 8:22; 2 Chr 21:10). (2) After King Sennacherib of Assyria took the city of Lachish, he proceeded to attack Libnah (2 Kgs 19:8; Is 37:8). Earlier Isaiah had affirmed to King Hezekiah that a rumor would cause the invading king to interrupt his military campaign against Judah and return to his own land; it was while Sennacherib was besieging Libnah that Isaiah’s affirmation was confirmed (2 Kgs 19:7-8). (3) The mother of Jehoahaz and Zedekiah, two of Judah’s last kings, was a native of Libnah (2 Kgs 23:31; 24:18; Jer 52:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIBNAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. One of the stations at which the Israelites encamped during the wilderness journey. It was situated between Rimmon-perez and Rissah (Nm 33:20-21). <em>See<\/em> Wilderness Wanderings.<\/li>\n<li>2. Canaanite city-state in southern Palestine, conquered and destroyed by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:29-31; 12:15). It was located within Judah’s territory (15:42) and later given to the Levites for an inheritance (Jos 21:13; 1 Chr 6:57).<\/li>\n<p>Three details in the city’s subsequent history are noted in Scripture: (1) During the reign of King Jehoram of Judah, at the time of Edom’s uprising, Libnah joined in the revolt but was subdued (2 Kgs 8:22; 2 Chr 21:10). (2) After King Sennacherib of Assyria took the city of Lachish, he proceeded to attack Libnah (2 Kgs 19:8; Is 37:8). Earlier Isaiah had affirmed to King Hezekiah that a rumor would cause the invading king to interrupt his military campaign against Judah and return to his own land; it was while Sennacherib was besieging Libnah that Isaiah’s affirmation was confirmed (2 Kgs 19:7-8). (3) The mother of Jehoahaz and Zedekiah, two of Judah’s last kings, was a native of Libnah (2 Kgs 23:31; 24:18; Jer 52:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIBNAH 1. One of the stations at which the Israelites encamped during the wilderness journey. It was situated between Rimmon-perez and Rissah (Nm 33:20-21). See Wilderness Wanderings. 2. Canaanite city-state in southern Palestine, conquered and destroyed by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:29-31; 12:15). It was located within Judah’s territory (15:42) and later given to the Levites for an inheritance (Jos 21:13; 1 Chr 6:57). Three details in the city’s subsequent history are noted in Scrip...","summary_en":"LIBNAH 1. One of the stations at which the Israelites encamped during the wilderness journey. It was situated between Rimmon-perez and Rissah (Nm 33:20-21). See Wilderness Wanderings. 2. Canaanite city-state in southern Palestine, conquered and destroyed by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:29-31; 12:15). It was located within Judah’s territory (15:42) and later given to the Levites for an inheritance (Jos 21:13; 1 Chr 6:57). Three details in the city’s subsequent history are noted in Scrip...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45470,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:29","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:29-30<\/strong> <em>Libnah<\/em> was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:29-30<\/strong> <em>Libnah<\/em> was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:29-30 Libnah was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.","summary_en":"10:29-30 Libnah was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73096,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:29","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:29-30<\/strong> <em>Libnah<\/em> was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:29-30<\/strong> <em>Libnah<\/em> was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:29-30 Libnah was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.","summary_en":"10:29-30 Libnah was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100722,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:29","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:29-30<\/strong> <em>Libnah<\/em> was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:29-30<\/strong> <em>Libnah<\/em> was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:29-30 Libnah was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.","summary_en":"10:29-30 Libnah was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128348,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:29","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:29-30<\/strong> <em>Libnah<\/em> was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:29-30<\/strong> <em>Libnah<\/em> was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:29-30 Libnah was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.","summary_en":"10:29-30 Libnah was probably about six miles north of Lachish. Because the location of Makkedah is uncertain, how far it was from Libnah is also unknown.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":45471,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:31","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:31-33<\/strong> <em>Lachish,<\/em> by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until <em>the second day<\/em> to capture it. • <em>Gezer<\/em> was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:31-33<\/strong> <em>Lachish,<\/em> by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until <em>the second day<\/em> to capture it. • <em>Gezer<\/em> was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:31-33 Lachish, by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until the second day to capture it. • Gezer was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.","summary_en":"10:31-33 Lachish, by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until the second day to capture it. • Gezer was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73097,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:31","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:31-33<\/strong> <em>Lachish,<\/em> by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until <em>the second day<\/em> to capture it. • <em>Gezer<\/em> was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:31-33<\/strong> <em>Lachish,<\/em> by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until <em>the second day<\/em> to capture it. • <em>Gezer<\/em> was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:31-33 Lachish, by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until the second day to capture it. • Gezer was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.","summary_en":"10:31-33 Lachish, by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until the second day to capture it. • Gezer was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100723,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:31","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:31-33<\/strong> <em>Lachish,<\/em> by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until <em>the second day<\/em> to capture it. • <em>Gezer<\/em> was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:31-33<\/strong> <em>Lachish,<\/em> by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until <em>the second day<\/em> to capture it. • <em>Gezer<\/em> was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:31-33 Lachish, by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until the second day to capture it. • Gezer was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.","summary_en":"10:31-33 Lachish, by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until the second day to capture it. • Gezer was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128349,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:31","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:31-33<\/strong> <em>Lachish,<\/em> by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until <em>the second day<\/em> to capture it. • <em>Gezer<\/em> was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:31-33<\/strong> <em>Lachish,<\/em> by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until <em>the second day<\/em> to capture it. • <em>Gezer<\/em> was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:31-33 Lachish, by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until the second day to capture it. • Gezer was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.","summary_en":"10:31-33 Lachish, by far the most important of the six cities taken at this time, was defended so well that it took Joshua until the second day to capture it. • Gezer was about twenty-five miles north of Lachish. Lachish and Gezer might have had a mutual aid treaty.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":13721,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gezer","title_en":"Gezer","content_ro":"<h3>GEZER<\/h3>\n<p>Modern Tell Jezer (also known as Tell Abu Shusha), and an important ancient city in a strategic position in the north Shephelah hills. The city of the third millennium <span>BC<\/span> was protected by a brick wall, which was replaced by a 13-foot- (4-meter-) thick stone wall. The Canaanite city reached its zenith during the 20th to 14th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. The so-called outer wall was 14 feet (4.3 meters) thick and enclosed an area of 27 acres. There was a Canaanite high place (c. 1600 <span>BC<\/span>) with 10 pillars or standing stones (up to 10 feet, or 3 meters, high) and a stone altar or basin. A 216-foot (65.8-meter) tunnel with steps led down to a spring in a cave, so that there was safe and ready access to water in time of siege, as at Gibeon and other Palestinian sites. Objects found indicate cultural and commercial contacts with Egypt. The Gezer Calendar, a stone tablet with a Hebrew inscription that gives the months of the year in terms of agricultural activities, has been dated to the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Horam, the king of Gezer, was defeated by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:33). Gezer was a Levitical city in the tribal territory of Ephraim (16:3; 21:21), but Ephraim was unable to drive out the Canaanites (Jgs 1:29). Merneptah (c. 1225–1215 <span>BC<\/span>) of Egyptian dynasty 19 lists Gezer, along with Ashkelon and Yanoam, on the Israel Stele, which gives an account of his conquests.<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of David, the Philistines invaded the plain of Rephaim, but the Lord instructed David in a successful ambush and David struck down the Philistines “from Geba to Gezer” (2 Sm 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s marriage to the daughter of the king of Egypt, the pharaoh, whose identity is uncertain, captured and burned Gezer and gave it as a dowry to his daughter (1 Kgs 9:16). Solomon rebuilt Gezer, along with a number of other cities that served as store-cities or chariot-cities (cf. vv 15-19). He fortified Gezer and made a strong gate with four sets of piers, like those at Hazor and Megiddo.<\/p>\n<p>In the fifth year of Rehoboam’s reign, Shishak (Sheshonk), king of Egypt, invaded Israel (1 Kgs 14:25). Gezer is included in the list of captured cities inscribed on the wall of the temple of Karnak.<\/p>\n<p>The capture of Gezer by the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) was shown in reliefs on the walls of his palace at Nimrud (biblical Calah). The Assyrians brought to Gezer conquered people from other areas, as they did at Samaria (2 Kgs 17:24). Cuneiform tablets of contracts testify to their presence.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GEZER<\/h3>\n<p>Modern Tell Jezer (also known as Tell Abu Shusha), and an important ancient city in a strategic position in the north Shephelah hills. The city of the third millennium <span>BC<\/span> was protected by a brick wall, which was replaced by a 13-foot- (4-meter-) thick stone wall. The Canaanite city reached its zenith during the 20th to 14th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. The so-called outer wall was 14 feet (4.3 meters) thick and enclosed an area of 27 acres. There was a Canaanite high place (c. 1600 <span>BC<\/span>) with 10 pillars or standing stones (up to 10 feet, or 3 meters, high) and a stone altar or basin. A 216-foot (65.8-meter) tunnel with steps led down to a spring in a cave, so that there was safe and ready access to water in time of siege, as at Gibeon and other Palestinian sites. Objects found indicate cultural and commercial contacts with Egypt. The Gezer Calendar, a stone tablet with a Hebrew inscription that gives the months of the year in terms of agricultural activities, has been dated to the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Horam, the king of Gezer, was defeated by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:33). Gezer was a Levitical city in the tribal territory of Ephraim (16:3; 21:21), but Ephraim was unable to drive out the Canaanites (Jgs 1:29). Merneptah (c. 1225–1215 <span>BC<\/span>) of Egyptian dynasty 19 lists Gezer, along with Ashkelon and Yanoam, on the Israel Stele, which gives an account of his conquests.<\/p>\n<p>During the reign of David, the Philistines invaded the plain of Rephaim, but the Lord instructed David in a successful ambush and David struck down the Philistines “from Geba to Gezer” (2 Sm 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>After Solomon’s marriage to the daughter of the king of Egypt, the pharaoh, whose identity is uncertain, captured and burned Gezer and gave it as a dowry to his daughter (1 Kgs 9:16). Solomon rebuilt Gezer, along with a number of other cities that served as store-cities or chariot-cities (cf. vv 15-19). He fortified Gezer and made a strong gate with four sets of piers, like those at Hazor and Megiddo.<\/p>\n<p>In the fifth year of Rehoboam’s reign, Shishak (Sheshonk), king of Egypt, invaded Israel (1 Kgs 14:25). Gezer is included in the list of captured cities inscribed on the wall of the temple of Karnak.<\/p>\n<p>The capture of Gezer by the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) was shown in reliefs on the walls of his palace at Nimrud (biblical Calah). The Assyrians brought to Gezer conquered people from other areas, as they did at Samaria (2 Kgs 17:24). Cuneiform tablets of contracts testify to their presence.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GEZER Modern Tell Jezer (also known as Tell Abu Shusha), and an important ancient city in a strategic position in the north Shephelah hills. The city of the third millennium BC was protected by a brick wall, which was replaced by a 13-foot- (4-meter-) thick stone wall. The Canaanite city reached its zenith during the 20th to 14th centuries BC. The so-called outer wall was 14 feet (4.3 meters) thick and enclosed an area of 27 acres. There was a Canaanite high place (c. 1600 BC) with 10 pillars...","summary_en":"GEZER Modern Tell Jezer (also known as Tell Abu Shusha), and an important ancient city in a strategic position in the north Shephelah hills. The city of the third millennium BC was protected by a brick wall, which was replaced by a 13-foot- (4-meter-) thick stone wall. The Canaanite city reached its zenith during the 20th to 14th centuries BC. The so-called outer wall was 14 feet (4.3 meters) thick and enclosed an area of 27 acres. There was a Canaanite high place (c. 1600 BC) with 10 pillars...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16654,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Horam","title_en":"Horam","content_ro":"<h3>HORAM<\/h3>\n<p>King of Gezer who, while coming to the aid of Lachish, was defeated and killed by Joshua (Jos 10:33).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HORAM<\/h3>\n<p>King of Gezer who, while coming to the aid of Lachish, was defeated and killed by Joshua (Jos 10:33).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HORAM King of Gezer who, while coming to the aid of Lachish, was defeated and killed by Joshua (Jos 10:33).","summary_en":"HORAM King of Gezer who, while coming to the aid of Lachish, was defeated and killed by Joshua (Jos 10:33).","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":13243,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gath","title_en":"Gath","content_ro":"<h3>GATH<\/h3>\n<p>Walled city (2 Chr 26:6) and one of the five chief cities of the Philistines, which also included Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Ekron (Jos 13:3; 1 Sm 6:17), all situated on or near the southern coast of Palestine. Although frequently involved in conflict with the Israelites, the city was apparently not subdued until David’s time (1 Chr 18:1). It was a Canaanite city, the home of the giant Goliath (1 Sm 17:4) and other men of great height (2 Sm 21:18-22). A remnant of the Anakim was left, even after the extensive campaigns of Joshua (Jos 10:36-39; 11:21-22).<\/p>\n<p>When the Philistines captured the ark of God, they carried it from Ebenezer to Ashdod, from there to Gath (1 Sm 5:8), and then to Ekron. After many of the Philistines died or were stricken with tumors, the ark was returned to Israel, first to Beth-shemesh and then to Kiriath-jearim (6:14; 7:1). When David fled from Saul, he came to Gath and feigned madness before Achish, the king of the city (21:10-15). During the rebellion of Absalom, 600 Gittites served among David’s mercenaries (2 Sm 15:18). According to 2 Chronicles 11:8, Rehoboam fortified the city of Gath, and 2 Kings 12:17 relates that it was taken by Hazael, king of Syria, in the ninth century. But it was apparently again in Philistine control when Uzziah broke down its walls (2 Chr 26:6). The city disappeared after being besieged and conquered by Sargon II in the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> (Am 6:2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Philistia, Philistines.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GATH<\/h3>\n<p>Walled city (2 Chr 26:6) and one of the five chief cities of the Philistines, which also included Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Ekron (Jos 13:3; 1 Sm 6:17), all situated on or near the southern coast of Palestine. Although frequently involved in conflict with the Israelites, the city was apparently not subdued until David’s time (1 Chr 18:1). It was a Canaanite city, the home of the giant Goliath (1 Sm 17:4) and other men of great height (2 Sm 21:18-22). A remnant of the Anakim was left, even after the extensive campaigns of Joshua (Jos 10:36-39; 11:21-22).<\/p>\n<p>When the Philistines captured the ark of God, they carried it from Ebenezer to Ashdod, from there to Gath (1 Sm 5:8), and then to Ekron. After many of the Philistines died or were stricken with tumors, the ark was returned to Israel, first to Beth-shemesh and then to Kiriath-jearim (6:14; 7:1). When David fled from Saul, he came to Gath and feigned madness before Achish, the king of the city (21:10-15). During the rebellion of Absalom, 600 Gittites served among David’s mercenaries (2 Sm 15:18). According to 2 Chronicles 11:8, Rehoboam fortified the city of Gath, and 2 Kings 12:17 relates that it was taken by Hazael, king of Syria, in the ninth century. But it was apparently again in Philistine control when Uzziah broke down its walls (2 Chr 26:6). The city disappeared after being besieged and conquered by Sargon II in the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> (Am 6:2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Philistia, Philistines.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GATH Walled city (2 Chr 26:6) and one of the five chief cities of the Philistines, which also included Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Ekron (Jos 13:3; 1 Sm 6:17), all situated on or near the southern coast of Palestine. Although frequently involved in conflict with the Israelites, the city was apparently not subdued until David’s time (1 Chr 18:1). It was a Canaanite city, the home of the giant Goliath (1 Sm 17:4) and other men of great height (2 Sm 21:18-22). A remnant of the Anakim was left, e...","summary_en":"GATH Walled city (2 Chr 26:6) and one of the five chief cities of the Philistines, which also included Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Ekron (Jos 13:3; 1 Sm 6:17), all situated on or near the southern coast of Palestine. Although frequently involved in conflict with the Israelites, the city was apparently not subdued until David’s time (1 Chr 18:1). It was a Canaanite city, the home of the giant Goliath (1 Sm 17:4) and other men of great height (2 Sm 21:18-22). A remnant of the Anakim was left, e...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21231,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Judges","title_en":"Book of Judges","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The book reflects a final editing of the material in the period of the early monarchy. It may well be a polemic for the righteous rule of David over against the kingship of Saul, which was molded by a secular, Canaanite conception of kingship rather than by the law of God. The author was almost certainly not Samuel, as traditionally thought, but a later compiler who relied on ancient written materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Though the judges succeeded in giving the tribes some rest from the incursions of surrounding enemies, the Israelites were continually harassed over long periods of time. Scholarly opinion differs on the duration of the period of the judges. The dating of the exodus affects the dating of the beginning of the judges. Those who take an early date for the exodus put the beginning around 1370–1360 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas others propose a date close to the end of the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. A related issue pertains to the chronology of the judges. Does Judges give a chronological, sequential account of the period, or is the book a representative account of judges from various parts of Canaan and Transjordan who “judged” a region, a tribe, or several tribes simultaneously?<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteraryFramework\">Literary Framework<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the stories in the book bear the marks of literary creativity. The stories are classics in their own right. The poetry of Deborah’s song (Jgs 5) is very moving, and the fable of Jotham (9:8-15) is a fine example of figurative speech. The care given to the stories is also reflected in the construction of the book. There are two introductions: a political one (Jgs 1:1–2:5) and a socioreligious one (2:6–3:6). The political introduction connects Judges with the story of the Conquest, when the tribes attempted to occupy the land. It prepares the reader for the political and military problems of the era of the judges. The socioreligious introduction explains why Israel had so many adversities, why the institution of the judges arose, and why the Lord never gave Israel the promised lasting rest from its enemies. The main body of the book is the story of the judges (3:7–16:31). References to the minor judges (six in all) are set within the stories of the major judges in increasing frequency. As is evident from the schema, the number of minor judges increased in frequency in proportion to the decrease in number of major judges: two major, one minor; two major, two minor; one major, three minor; one major. There is a total of 12 judges, representative of the 12 tribes of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the listing of 12 judges, representative of the various parts of Canaan and Transjordan, is to demonstrate that all tribes throughout the conquered territories experienced grave difficulties from a variety of enemies: Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Canaanites, and Philistines. Israel was hard pressed on nearly all its frontiers. The appendixes (chs 17–21), together with the two introductions, form the framework of the book. The political and socioreligious problems (1:1–3:6) are presented by way of several stories in the last chapters. The final editor who gave the book its canonical shape purposefully framed the stories of the judges so as to show lack of movement. The successes of the previous stages in redemptive history came to a standstill in the ebb and flow of the judges. Though the Lord delivered his people in many ways, they returned to the problems described in 1:1–3:6. The appendixes describe Israel’s problems representative of the period of the judges, when “there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for deliverance, and God’s raising up of a judge reflects a deuteronomic perspective with its warnings concerning disobedience and judgment. The repetitiveness of the cycle supports the contention of the anonymous narrator that Israel remained unchanged by the grace of God. However, in spite of the moral, religious, and political anarchy as well as the civil wars, the last chapter shows that the tribes are still concerned with each other’s welfare. Though the unity of God’s people has been gravely challenged, the situation is not hopeless. The book ends on a note of hope—hope for a king who may deliver Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Thus, there are several purposes of the book: (1) to demonstrate the meaninglessness of this stage in Israel’s development; (2) to explain why the tribes did not occupy all the land promised to the patriarchs; (3) to justify the way of God, who was gracious and patient with Israel’s repeated acts of disobedience; (4) to set forth the legitimacy of a “shepherd” king in contrast to a despotic form of kingship; and (5) to explain the urgent need for a new momentum, lest Israel succumb to the Philistines and intertribal warfare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Political Introduction (1:1–2:5)<\/h5>\n<p>In Joshua 1–12 the warfare under Joshua is portrayed as a mobilization of Canaanite forces against Israel. By the intervention of the Lord, the Canaanite resistance was put down and the land was occupied by the tribes (chs 13–21). Joshua 13–21, however, clearly shows that each tribe had problems ridding its territory of pockets of Canaanite resistance, which were usually centered around heavily guarded and well-fortified cities (cf. 13:2-6, 13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua emphasizes the successes and minimizes the problems, whereas the prologue to Judges sets the stage for the whole book by openly addressing Israel’s problems and failures. As the book unfolds, it is precisely these problems and failures that in due time bring Israel to the brink of disaster.<\/p>\n<p>The period of the judges began with the death of Joshua (Jgs 1:1; 2:8-9). The Israelites had inherited a legacy from Joshua: the law of the Lord (Jos 23:6; 24:26), the land, a challenge to obey the Lord (24:14-27), and a promise of God’s presence and help in subduing the Canaanites (23:5, 10).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah and Simeon (Jgs 1:2-20)<\/h6>\n<p>The prominence of Judah and Caleb parallels the position of Judah in Joshua (Jos 14:6–15:63; cf. also the house of Joseph, Jgs 1:22-29; cf. Jos 16–17). Judah was victorious over the cruel Adoni-bezek, who ruled over Bezek, a town of uncertain location. Judah successfully occupied the hill country, the Negev, and the western foothills. They even took Jerusalem, or an outlying suburb identified with Jerusalem (Jos 1:8), but could not retain control there (v 21) until David’s conquest of the city (2 Sm 5:6-9). Judah was victorious over the Canaanites in the region of Hebron, already conquered under Joshua (Jos 10:36). Hebron, also known as Kiriath-arba (“city of four” or “tetrapolis”), was a powerful ally of Jerusalem (v 3) and had been able to rally military support for a new assault on Israel, even after its first defeat. Caleb received Hebron, as Moses had promised (Jgs 1:20; cf. Jos 15:13). After the victory over Hebron, Judah extended its control over the southern hill country by an attack on Debir (Jgs 1:11-15; cf. Jos 15:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Kenites (Jgs 1:16), descendants of Jethro and therefore related to Moses by marriage, settled in the Negev around Arad and the City of Palms, which here probably refers to Tamar rather than Jericho.<\/p>\n<p>Judah secured the southern border by a victory over the Canaanites at Hormah (Jgs 1:17; cf. Nm 14:45; 21:3; Dt 1:44) and the coastal plain by victories at Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron. However, Judah’s successes in the coastal plain were resisted by a well-armed Canaanite force (Jgs 1:18-19). It occupied the Judean hill country and the Negev, but could not retain control over the plains. The Philistines were soon to take control over Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, and incorporate them into their pentapolis.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin (1:21)<\/h6>\n<p>Jerusalem was situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Judah took the city or a suburb (Jos 1:8) but was too far removed to retain control over it. Benjamin was too weak to subdue the Jebusites. Only David succeeded in this (2 Sm 5:6-9); he incorporated it into Judah (cf. Jos 15:63), even though it originally was allotted to Benjamin (Jos 18:28).<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh (1:22-29)<\/h6>\n<p>Ephraim took Bethel, known from the patriarchal stories as a significant cultic site (Gn 12:8; 13:3-4; 28:19; 31:13; 35:1-15). However, Manasseh was unsuccessful in taking the fortified cities in the valley of Jezreel (Esdraelon): Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor, Ibleam, and Megiddo. These cities controlled traffic along the east-west and north–south roads as well as the important passes through the Carmel range and the ford of the Jordan. Ephraim could not take full possession of the coastal plain, controlled by Gezer. The success of both Ephraim and Manasseh was limited.<\/p>\n<h6>The Other Four Tribes (1:30-36)<\/h6>\n<p>The other four tribes in Canaan receive brief mention. They, too, were only partially successful. Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and especially Dan did not fully succeed in driving out the Canaanites. At best they later subjected most of them to forced labor.<\/p>\n<h6>The Failure of Israel (2:1-5)<\/h6>\n<p>The failure to subdue the land and to wipe out the Canaanites and their culture led to intermarriage and idolatry (cf. Ex 23:33; 34:12-16; Nm 33:55; Dt 7:2-5, 16; Jos 23:7, 12).<\/p>\n<p>The identity of “the angel of the Lord” who appears at Bokim is far from certain. It may be a reference to the Lord himself, to an angelic messenger, or to a prophet (cf. Jgs 6:8). He rebuked the people in the prophetic spirit and pronounced God’s judgment as taking the form of continual confrontation between Israel and the Canaanites (2:3). Their weeping and sacrificing were to no avail (2:4-5; cf. Mal 2:13). Israel stood condemned within a generation after Joshua’s death.<\/p>\n<h5>The Theological Introduction (2:6–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>The theological introduction begins where Joshua left off (Jos 24:28-31). The generation of Joshua was characterized by loyalty, but their loyalty to the Lord did not last long after the excitement of the Conquest and the demonstration of God’s presence (Jgs 2:10). Israel served Canaanite gods (Baal and Astarte) instead. Baal was the storm god, symbolic of rain and fertility, and Astarte was his cohort. The plural (Baals and Ashtaroth, 2:11-13) signifies the many local ways in which the Canaanite gods were worshiped. The religious unity was broken up into a great diversity. Thus Israel angered the Lord (vv 12-14), who sent them enemies and plunderers. Israel was unsuccessful in dealing with them, as Moses and Joshua had forewarned (Dt 28:25, 33; Jos 23:13, 16). The cycle of apostasy, judgment, cry for mercy, and deliverance is found throughout Judges. The people were rooted in the apostasy of their forefathers, even though the previous generation had been sensitive to God. Israel did not submit to the leadership of the judges, except to free itself from the oppressors. In fulfillment of the curses of the covenant, God swore not to give his people rest but to test them and to train them for warfare (Jgs 3:1-4), so that they might learn to respond to the challenges of a real world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Judges of Israel (3:7–16:31)<\/h5>\n<h6>Othniel (3:7-11)<\/h6>\n<p>Othniel is a transitional figure, linking the Conquest and the judges. He had involved himself in the conquest of Kiriath-sepher and was related to Caleb as his cousin and son-in-law (1:13). He repelled the Arameans led by Cushan-rishathaim, so that the land enjoyed peace for some 40 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ehud (3:12-30)<\/h6>\n<p>The Moabites, allied with the Ammonites and Amalekites, came against Israel from the east and oppressed them for 18 years under the leadership of Eglon. Ehud led the mission to bring tribute to Eglon at his palace, located probably by Jericho (the City of Palms). Ehud was uniquely qualified for this mission; being left-handed, he was able to use his double-edged sword in an unsuspecting manner to stab the king. Ehud’s success was the result of careful plotting and the element of surprise. He paid the tribute and left, only to return with a supposed oracle from the gods. The king fell for the deception and was murdered. The delay at the Moabite court gave the Israelites an opportunity to bring their forces together at the fords of the Jordan. Ehud’s success was complete; no Moabite escaped, and Israel enjoyed peace for 80 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Shamgar (3:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Shamgar’s exploits were against the Philistines in the coastal plains. He had a non-Israelite name but was probably an Israelite by birth. Like Samson he fought the Philistines with an unconventional weapon (an ox goad). His name is also mentioned in the song of Deborah (5:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Deborah and Barak (4:1–5:31)<\/h6>\n<p>The narrative now turns to the Canaanite aggressors in the north under the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor, and Sisera, of Harosheth-haggoyim (4:1-3). The ruins of Hazor (Jos 11:13) had been rebuilt, and another Jabin (cf. v 1) ruled over the region. He had regained his military power, as he had as many as 900 chariots of iron. He oppressed Israel for 20 years (Jgs 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>God had a prophetess in Israel who led his people during this dark time (4:4). She rendered judgments under a palm tree in southern Ephraim near Benjamin (v 5). She called on Barak to muster the armies of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes affected by the Canaanite raids, and to engage Sisera in a surprise attack by the Kishon River (vv 6-7). Barak’s hesitancy led him to request Deborah’s presence, which resulted in his forfeiture of the honor of killing Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite forces (vv 8-10). The Lord gave success to the surprise attack from Mt Tabor, so that the Canaanites were routed, unable to use their heavy chariots, which were mired down in the swamps of the Jezreel Valley (5:20-22). The Canaanites were routed, and Sisera was killed by Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite who had separated from the Kenites around Arad (4:17-18; cf. 1:16). She offered him hospitality, as her family had friendly relations with the Canaanites, but heroically put him to death with a tent peg (4:18-21; 5:26-27). In successive campaigns the Israelites gained freedom from Jabin, until they destroyed his power (4:24).<\/p>\n<p>The song of Deborah (ch 5) celebrates, in poetic fashion, the victory over Jabin. It is one of the oldest poems in the Bible. It praises the God of Israel as the King who comes to protect his covenant people, and before whom the mountains move (5:2-3). He is the God of Mt Sinai (Jgs 5:4-5; cf. Dt 33:2; Ps 68:7-8; Hb 3:3-4). Though the oppressors had despoiled Israel and had made the roads unsafe for travel, and Israel was unable to defend itself (Jgs 5:6-8), the Lord raised up Deborah and Barak to lead the nobles to war (vv 9-13). They came from Ephraim, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar, and Naphtali (vv 14-15a, 18), but the Transjordan tribes and Asher did not want to get involved (vv 15b-17). The song then moves to the battle scene, where torrential rains bogged the chariots down (vv 19-23). Jael is celebrated as “most blessed of women,” who used her simple way of life to bring an end to Sisera (vv 24-27). She stands in contrast to Sisera’s mother, who is portrayed with all her culture waiting in vain for Sisera’s return with all of his spoils (vv 28-30). The Lord has used the simple to confound the powerful. The conclusion is a prayer for God’s judgment on all of Israel’s enemies (Jgs 5:31a; cf. Ps 68:1-3).<\/p>\n<h6>Gideon (6:1–8:35)<\/h6>\n<p>Israel’s rest for 40 years (Jgs 5:31b) was disturbed by the invasion of Midianites and Amalekites from the East (6:1-3). They destroyed the economy by invading the country at harvesttime (vv 4-6). In response to Israel’s cry, God sent a prophet with a message similar to that of the angel of the Lord (2:1-5). Then an angel appeared to Gideon and called him to lead the people in battle (6:11-14). The Lord assured him of his presence (v 16) by a sign (vv 17-22). Gideon knew that he had been visited by the Lord and built an altar called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Peace” in Ophrah (v 24). He responded by destroying the cultic site dedicated to Baal and Asherah at Ophrah (vv 25-28) and by initiating worship at the new altar (v 28). Baal did not protect his own altar (vv 29-32), even when challenged by Gideon’s father (v 31). Consequently, Gideon was known as Jerubbaal (meaning, “let Baal contend with him,” v 32).<\/p>\n<p>Next, Gideon mustered an army of 32,000 men from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (6:35; cf. 7:3b). In order to assure himself of the Lord’s presence, he asked for another sign: the sign of the fleece (6:36-40). It must be kept in mind that Gideon lived in an area in which the wonders of God had been scarce (v 13) and that he, like Moses, needed reassurance that God was with him. God responded to his growing faith. Gideon went forth with a greatly reduced army of 300 against the enemy. Of his original army, 22,000 had left because they were afraid (7:2-3; cf. Dt 20:8). Another 9,700 were sent home, though they were valiant men (7:4-8). After assuring Gideon by a dream of an enemy soldier, God used the 300 in a marvelous way to confound the Midianites (vv 9-15). God gave Israel victory over the Midianite leaders Oreb, Zeeb, Zebah, and Zalmunna (7:16–8:21). Gideon wisely avoided a possible military confrontation with Ephraim (8:1-3), pursued the enemy deep into the Transjordan, and punished the leaders of Succoth and Penuel, who did not assist him (vv 4-9, 13-16).<\/p>\n<p>This glorious victory created a new wave of interest in the idea of kingship. The men of Israel wished to establish the family of Gideon as their royal dynasty (8:22). Gideon refused, and instead wrongly set up an ephod, cast from the gold taken in battle (vv 23-27). The ephod was probably used for cultic practices, possibly divination (cf. 17:5).<\/p>\n<p>Gideon’s era also came to an end. He was God’s instrument, giving Israel rest for 40 years. He fathered 70 sons and died in old age. God had richly blessed him, even though he had led Israel astray with his ephod. Thereafter, Israel returned to Baal worship (8:33-35).<\/p>\n<p>In the wake of Gideon’s era, his son Abimelech attempted to establish dynastic continuity by having himself installed as king at Shechem (9:1-6). With the support of his relatives at Shechem, Abimelech had all his brothers killed except Jotham (vv 4-5). After Abimelech’s coronation, Jotham set forth his opposition to his brother in a proverbial manner (vv 7-20), and went into hiding. Three years later Abimelech’s evil schemes entrapped him when the citizens of Shechem rebelled. He furiously attacked the city and destroyed it. A short time later, however, he was wounded at Thebez by a millstone dropped by a woman from the tower in which she had sought refuge from him. His servant put him out of his misery as per his request. This episode demonstrates how bad a despotic king may be. Again, God’s justice prevailed.<\/p>\n<h6>Tola (10:1-2)<\/h6>\n<p>Tola was a minor judge from Issachar who judged Israel for 23 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jair (10:3-5)<\/h6>\n<p>Jair was a minor judge from Gilead who judged Israel for 22 years.<\/p>\n<h6>Jephthah (10:6–12:7)<\/h6>\n<p>A recapitulation (10:6-16) of the cycle (idolatry, enemies, cry for help, momentary repentance) sets the introduction to the Jephthah narrative. Under attack from the Ammonites, the elders of Gilead requested help from Jephthah (10:17–11:8), who promised to help them on the condition that he remain their leader even after the war (vv 9-10). At a solemn ceremony he becomes their “head” at Mizpah (v 11). Jephthah opened up correspondence with the Ammonite king, in which he argued for Israel’s rights on the basis of the Israelites’ historic claim to the land as granted to them by the Lord (vv 12–27). Instead of going out immediately to war, he hoped that “the <span>Lord<\/span>, the Judge” would settle the dispute (v 27); but the Ammonite king was unimpressed. When the Spirit of God came over him, Jephthah led Israel into battle, but only after making a rash vow. He was victorious but found out that his vow to sacrifice whatever came first out of his house required him to sacrifice his daughter. Debate continues as to whether he offered her up as a human sacrifice or whether she sacrificed marriage (see discussion under Jephthah).<\/p>\n<p>The Ephraimites seemed to have had an insatiable desire for war. Earlier they had complained to Gideon, who successfully defused their threats (8:1-3). Jephthah fought them, however, because the Israelites living in Transjordan had been reviled as “renegades” (12:1-4). Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed by the fords of the Jordan in this civil war. Thereafter, Jephthah ruled for only six years.<\/p>\n<h6>Ibzan (12:8-10)<\/h6>\n<p>Ibzan was a minor judge from Bethlehem who ruled Israel for seven years.<\/p>\n<h6>Elon (12:11)<\/h6>\n<p>A minor judge from Zebulun, Elon ruled Israel for ten years.<\/p>\n<h6>Abdon (12:13-15)<\/h6>\n<p>Abdon was a minor judge from Pirathon, the location of which is uncertain. He ruled for eight years.<\/p>\n<h6>Samson (13:1–16:31)<\/h6>\n<p>Samson’s greatness in the history of redemption is due to his miraculous birth (13:1-24), his service as a Nazirite (13:7; cf. Nm 6:1-21), the repeated overpowering by the Spirit of the Lord (Jgs 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14), the single-handed exploits against the Philistines (Ashkelon, 14:19; the fields, 15:1-6; Ramath Etam, 15:7-17; Gaza, 16:1-3, 23-30), and his occasional dependence on the Lord (15:18-19; 16:28-30). However, his personal life was flawed because of his weakness for Philistine women (chs 14, 16). Having been seduced by Delilah, he was imprisoned at Gaza. He died in the collapse of Dagon’s temple, praying that the Lord would permit him to get revenge (16:28-30). He was buried in his father’s tomb in the territory of Dan (16:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue (17–21)<\/h5>\n<p>The cyclical nature of Israel’s existence was without movement. Rest from enemies was always temporary. Israel was not yet ready for dynastic kingship, and whatever one may say of the three years of Abimelech, it was a kingship of the worst sort. Israel vacillated between idolatry and belief in the true Lord. The period of the judges was unstable, marked by petty individualism and provincialism. Yet God remained sovereign in the affairs of his people. The epilogue contains two stories: the story of Micah and the Danite migration (chs 17–18) and the civil war (chs 19–21). The epilogue is bound together by the phrase “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25, <span>niv<\/span>). The symmetric recurrence (two times in each narrative) emphasizes the anarchy and inability of the tribes to unite together to serve God as a covenant people.<\/p>\n<h6>Micah and the Danites (17–18)<\/h6>\n<p>Micah was an Ephraimite who established a shrine and hired one of his own sons, and then a Levite from Bethlehem, to serve as its priests (ch 17). Unable to keep their patrimony, the Danites left to establish themselves at the foot of Mt Hermon. They took the idols and the Levite from Micah’s shrine and set up a cultic city at the newly established city of Dan, built on the ruins of Laish (ch 18). Thus, they set up a cultic center that rivaled the tabernacle at Shiloh (18:31).<\/p>\n<h6>The Civil War (19–21)<\/h6>\n<p>The people of Gibeah, which belonged to Benjamin, sexually abused the concubine of a Levite so that she died. Like the Levite of chapters 17 and 18, she was from Bethlehem (19:1). Dramatically, the Levite sent pieces of her corpse to all the tribes, which assembled against the Benjamites because they protected the criminals of Gibeah (19:29–20:19). In the ensuing battle the population of Benjamin was decimated (20:20-48). The 11 tribes gave them 400 virgins taken in a civil war against Jabesh-gilead (21:6-15). These were not enough, however. Because of the threat of the extinction of Benjamin and the vow not to give their daughters in marriage to any Benjamite, the Israelites devised a plan by which the Benjamites could take Israelite virgins dancing in the festival at Shiloh. Benjamin thus was able to rebuild its towns and settlements.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gideon; Jephthah; Samson.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","summary_en":"JUDGES, Book of Old Testament book named after the prominent leaders raised up by the Lord to deliver his people. The word “judge” in Hebrew also denotes the activity of governance, including warfare. Some scholars have argued that there were two kinds of judges: charismatic deliverers (or major judges) and local judicial sages (minor judges). It is uncertain why some judges receive cursory attention, whereas the exploits of other judges are given in great detail. Preview • Author • Date • Li...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":9106,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Debir (Place)","title_en":"Debir (Place)","content_ro":"<h3>DEBIR (P<span>lace<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Canaanite city originally held by the Anakim before being conquered by the Israelites (Jos 11:21; 15:15). There are two accounts of the conquest of Debir (10:38-39; 15:13-17). One of these lists Joshua as the conqueror, and the other lists Othniel as the conqueror (by request of Caleb). It is possible that the Othniel account is simply a further elaboration of the Joshua account, or it is possible that Debir was retaken by the Canaanites and the Othniel-Caleb account tells of the subsequent recapture by the Israelites. The latter explanation, however, does not seem to accord well with the apparent finality of the Joshua account. Thus, it would seem that the former explanation is more probable.<\/li>\n<p>Debir, with its pasturelands, was finally given to the priestly descendants of the Aaronites (Jos 21:15; 1 Chr 6:58). This might seem fitting, since prior to its capture by the Israelites, Debir was known for its pagan temple. Debir was also known as Kiriath-sannah, meaning “city of the scribes” (Jos 15:49), and Kiriath-sepher, meaning “city of the books” (v 15). Its exact location is disputed among scholars, but most likely it was located near Khirbet Rabud in the southern Judean hill country.<\/p>\n<li>2. Gadite town east of the Jordan River near the Sea of Galilee (Jos 13:26). It is possibly the same site as Lo-debar (2 Sm 9:4-5; 17:27; Am 6:13), where Mephibosheth once lived before David summoned him.<\/li>\n<li>3. Town on the northern border of Judah some 10 miles (16 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem (Jos 15:7).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>DEBIR (P<span>lace<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Canaanite city originally held by the Anakim before being conquered by the Israelites (Jos 11:21; 15:15). There are two accounts of the conquest of Debir (10:38-39; 15:13-17). One of these lists Joshua as the conqueror, and the other lists Othniel as the conqueror (by request of Caleb). It is possible that the Othniel account is simply a further elaboration of the Joshua account, or it is possible that Debir was retaken by the Canaanites and the Othniel-Caleb account tells of the subsequent recapture by the Israelites. The latter explanation, however, does not seem to accord well with the apparent finality of the Joshua account. Thus, it would seem that the former explanation is more probable.<\/li>\n<p>Debir, with its pasturelands, was finally given to the priestly descendants of the Aaronites (Jos 21:15; 1 Chr 6:58). This might seem fitting, since prior to its capture by the Israelites, Debir was known for its pagan temple. Debir was also known as Kiriath-sannah, meaning “city of the scribes” (Jos 15:49), and Kiriath-sepher, meaning “city of the books” (v 15). Its exact location is disputed among scholars, but most likely it was located near Khirbet Rabud in the southern Judean hill country.<\/p>\n<li>2. Gadite town east of the Jordan River near the Sea of Galilee (Jos 13:26). It is possibly the same site as Lo-debar (2 Sm 9:4-5; 17:27; Am 6:13), where Mephibosheth once lived before David summoned him.<\/li>\n<li>3. Town on the northern border of Judah some 10 miles (16 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem (Jos 15:7).<\/li>","summary_ro":"DEBIR (Place) 1. Canaanite city originally held by the Anakim before being conquered by the Israelites (Jos 11:21; 15:15). There are two accounts of the conquest of Debir (10:38-39; 15:13-17). One of these lists Joshua as the conqueror, and the other lists Othniel as the conqueror (by request of Caleb). It is possible that the Othniel account is simply a further elaboration of the Joshua account, or it is possible that Debir was retaken by the Canaanites and the Othniel-Caleb account tells of...","summary_en":"DEBIR (Place) 1. Canaanite city originally held by the Anakim before being conquered by the Israelites (Jos 11:21; 15:15). There are two accounts of the conquest of Debir (10:38-39; 15:13-17). One of these lists Joshua as the conqueror, and the other lists Othniel as the conqueror (by request of Caleb). It is possible that the Othniel account is simply a further elaboration of the Joshua account, or it is possible that Debir was retaken by the Canaanites and the Othniel-Caleb account tells of...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45472,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:38","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:38-39<\/strong> Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the <em>surrounding villages<\/em>—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:38-39<\/strong> Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the <em>surrounding villages<\/em>—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:38-39 Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the surrounding villages—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.","summary_en":"10:38-39 Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the surrounding villages—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73098,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:38","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:38-39<\/strong> Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the <em>surrounding villages<\/em>—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:38-39<\/strong> Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the <em>surrounding villages<\/em>—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:38-39 Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the surrounding villages—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.","summary_en":"10:38-39 Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the surrounding villages—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100724,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:38","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:38-39<\/strong> Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the <em>surrounding villages<\/em>—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:38-39<\/strong> Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the <em>surrounding villages<\/em>—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:38-39 Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the surrounding villages—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.","summary_en":"10:38-39 Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the surrounding villages—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128350,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:38","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:38-39<\/strong> Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the <em>surrounding villages<\/em>—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:38-39<\/strong> Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the <em>surrounding villages<\/em>—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:38-39 Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the surrounding villages—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.","summary_en":"10:38-39 Because settlement in the hill country was sparse, the surrounding villages—walled towns that could not maintain their independence—depended on the kingdoms of the dominant cities for protection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":20686,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45473,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:40","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this <em>whole region<\/em> when the settlement process began. • <em>the western foothills:<\/em> See study note on Deut 1:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this <em>whole region<\/em> when the settlement process began. • <em>the western foothills:<\/em> See study note on Deut 1:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:40 Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this whole region when the settlement process began. • the western foothills: See study note on Deut 1:7.","summary_en":"10:40 Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this whole region when the settlement process began. • the western foothills: See study note on Deut 1:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73099,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:40","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this <em>whole region<\/em> when the settlement process began. • <em>the western foothills:<\/em> See study note on Deut 1:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this <em>whole region<\/em> when the settlement process began. • <em>the western foothills:<\/em> See study note on Deut 1:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:40 Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this whole region when the settlement process began. • the western foothills: See study note on Deut 1:7.","summary_en":"10:40 Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this whole region when the settlement process began. • the western foothills: See study note on Deut 1:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100725,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:40","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this <em>whole region<\/em> when the settlement process began. • <em>the western foothills:<\/em> See study note on Deut 1:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this <em>whole region<\/em> when the settlement process began. • <em>the western foothills:<\/em> See study note on Deut 1:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:40 Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this whole region when the settlement process began. • the western foothills: See study note on Deut 1:7.","summary_en":"10:40 Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this whole region when the settlement process began. • the western foothills: See study note on Deut 1:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128351,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:40","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this <em>whole region<\/em> when the settlement process began. • <em>the western foothills:<\/em> See study note on Deut 1:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:40<\/strong> Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this <em>whole region<\/em> when the settlement process began. • <em>the western foothills:<\/em> See study note on Deut 1:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:40 Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this whole region when the settlement process began. • the western foothills: See study note on Deut 1:7.","summary_en":"10:40 Joshua’s southern campaign cleared the way for the southern tribes to occupy this whole region when the settlement process began. • the western foothills: See study note on Deut 1:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"41":[{"id":13269,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gaza","title_en":"Gaza","content_ro":"<h3>GAZA<\/h3>\n<p>City near the Palestinian coast, about 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) west-southwest of Jerusalem. It has been occupied almost continuously since ancient times; modern Gaza has played an important part in the conflict between Arabs and Israelis. Gazite and Gazathite are biblical names for the residents of the town.<\/p>\n<p>Set about midpoint of the length of the plain of Philistia, Gaza was a rich agricultural area where wheat and similar grains flourished. Situated some three miles (4.8 kilometers) from the Mediterranean, Gaza’s position as the greatest trading center of ancient Palestine did not come from the sea but from the highways, which brought caravans from all parts of the Fertile Crescent. This accessibility was also a handicap, for the roadways along the coast were the easiest route for the armies of Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome. Often Gaza was the victim of their passage.<\/p>\n\n<p>In the records of secular history, Gaza first shows up in the annals of Thutmose III in the temple of Karnak. Thutmose wisely scheduled his Asiatic campaigns just after the Egyptian harvest and in time to seize the harvest of Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>In Amarna Letter 289, Abdu-Heba of Jerusalem acknowledged that Gaza was loyal to the king of Egypt but complained that Addaya, the Egyptian ruler of Palestine whose residence was at Gaza, had taken the garrison the pharaoh had sent for Jerusalem. From the late 13th century <span>BC<\/span>, there is a satirical letter that was composed as an exercise for training scribes. In this letter, written from one scribe to belittle another, various itineraries are traced, including one from the frontier of Egypt to Gaza.<\/p>\n<p>Pharaoh Neco (610–595 <span>BC<\/span>) captured and chastised Gaza and Ashkelon in the reign of Josiah and Judah (cf. Jer 47:1, 5).<\/p>\n<p>Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) refers to Hanno of Gaza, who fled to Egypt just prior to the capture of Gaza by the Assyrians. On the Oriental Institute Prism and the Taylor Prism, Sennacherib (705–681 <span>BC<\/span>) tells of his invasion of Palestine and of how he shut up Hezekiah “like a bird in a cage.” He captured 46 of Hezekiah’s fortified cities and gave them to three minor kings, including Sillibel of Gaza, who is also mentioned by Esarhaddon (681–669 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ashurbanipal (669–633 <span>BC<\/span>). Reference to “the king of Gaza” also appears in the records of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon (604–562 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In 332 <span>BC<\/span> Gaza was captured and punished by Alexander the Great. He was angered because it had held out against him for two months, so he killed all of the men and sold the women and children into slavery. During the Maccabean period, it was taken by Alexander Janneus, who slaughtered its inhabitants.<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, Gaza is first mentioned in Genesis 10:19, where it is said that the territory of the Canaanites extended from Sidon to Gaza. In a summary of the conquests of Joshua, one of the dimensions of the conquered area is “from Kadesh-barnea to Gaza” (Jos 10:41). Joshua destroyed all the Anakim in the land, but some remained in Gaza and other Philistine cities (11:22). Another ancient people, the Avvim, “who lived in villages as far as Gaza,” were annihilated and replaced by the Caphtorim from Caphtor, or Crete (Dt 2:23). Gaza, along with its towns and villages, was listed among the tribal inheritance of Judah (Jos 15:47). At the time of Joshua’s advanced age, Gaza and the other four cities of the Philistine Pentapolis are said to be among the territories not yet taken (13:3); in Judges 1:18-19, however, it is reported that Judah took it.<\/p>\n<p>During the time of the judges, Midianite raiders swept through Israel, looting and destroying, even as far as Gaza (Jgs 6:4). In this period the main biblical interest in Gaza centers in the life and exploits of Samson. Philistine women were Samson’s weakness. He went to Gaza and found a prostitute with whom he had relations (16:1). The people of Gaza learned that he was there and determined to kill him in the morning, but Samson arose at midnight and went to the gate of the city, took the doors, posts, and the bar of the gate and carried them to the top of a hill facing Hebron.<\/p>\n<p>His involvement with another Philistine woman, Delilah, resulted in his capture by the Philistines, who gouged out his eyes and took him to Gaza (Jgs 16:21), where he was bound and forced to grind at a mill in the prison. On a festival day in the temple of Dagon, the reveling worshipers called for Samson to be brought so they could make sport of him. His strength was returning, and God answered his prayer for vengeance. Samson dislodged the two pillars that were the support of the stone slab roof of the pagan temple, so Samson died, along with a great number of Gazites.<\/p>\n<p>Gaza is named as the southern boundary of Israel during the time of Solomon, who ruled over “all the region west of the Euphrates from Tiphsah to Gaza” (1 Kgs 4:24). Hezekiah defeated the Philistines as far as Gaza (2 Kgs 18:8). When he rebelled against Assyria, Sennacherib came and took 46 of Hezekiah’s cities and gave them to the king of Gaza and two other kings.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 47 records a prophecy against the Philistines, which the Lord gave to the prophet before Pharaoh attacked Gaza (v 1; cf. v 5; see Neco above). Amos gives specific prophecies of judgment against Gaza (Am 1:6-7). Zephaniah also states that Gaza would be deserted (Zep 2:4). Zechariah 9 gives an oracle of judgment in which it is said that Gaza will suffer and that its king shall perish.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT there is only one reference to Gaza (Acts 8:26). Philip, who was preaching in Samaria, was told by an angel to go south to “the road that goes from Jerusalem to Gaza.” Here he met the treasurer of Cush, who was reading Isaiah 53 as he rode in his chariot. Philip preached the gospel to this man and baptized him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Philistia, Philistines.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GAZA<\/h3>\n<p>City near the Palestinian coast, about 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) west-southwest of Jerusalem. It has been occupied almost continuously since ancient times; modern Gaza has played an important part in the conflict between Arabs and Israelis. Gazite and Gazathite are biblical names for the residents of the town.<\/p>\n<p>Set about midpoint of the length of the plain of Philistia, Gaza was a rich agricultural area where wheat and similar grains flourished. Situated some three miles (4.8 kilometers) from the Mediterranean, Gaza’s position as the greatest trading center of ancient Palestine did not come from the sea but from the highways, which brought caravans from all parts of the Fertile Crescent. This accessibility was also a handicap, for the roadways along the coast were the easiest route for the armies of Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome. Often Gaza was the victim of their passage.<\/p>\n\n<p>In the records of secular history, Gaza first shows up in the annals of Thutmose III in the temple of Karnak. Thutmose wisely scheduled his Asiatic campaigns just after the Egyptian harvest and in time to seize the harvest of Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>In Amarna Letter 289, Abdu-Heba of Jerusalem acknowledged that Gaza was loyal to the king of Egypt but complained that Addaya, the Egyptian ruler of Palestine whose residence was at Gaza, had taken the garrison the pharaoh had sent for Jerusalem. From the late 13th century <span>BC<\/span>, there is a satirical letter that was composed as an exercise for training scribes. In this letter, written from one scribe to belittle another, various itineraries are traced, including one from the frontier of Egypt to Gaza.<\/p>\n<p>Pharaoh Neco (610–595 <span>BC<\/span>) captured and chastised Gaza and Ashkelon in the reign of Josiah and Judah (cf. Jer 47:1, 5).<\/p>\n<p>Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) refers to Hanno of Gaza, who fled to Egypt just prior to the capture of Gaza by the Assyrians. On the Oriental Institute Prism and the Taylor Prism, Sennacherib (705–681 <span>BC<\/span>) tells of his invasion of Palestine and of how he shut up Hezekiah “like a bird in a cage.” He captured 46 of Hezekiah’s fortified cities and gave them to three minor kings, including Sillibel of Gaza, who is also mentioned by Esarhaddon (681–669 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ashurbanipal (669–633 <span>BC<\/span>). Reference to “the king of Gaza” also appears in the records of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon (604–562 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In 332 <span>BC<\/span> Gaza was captured and punished by Alexander the Great. He was angered because it had held out against him for two months, so he killed all of the men and sold the women and children into slavery. During the Maccabean period, it was taken by Alexander Janneus, who slaughtered its inhabitants.<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, Gaza is first mentioned in Genesis 10:19, where it is said that the territory of the Canaanites extended from Sidon to Gaza. In a summary of the conquests of Joshua, one of the dimensions of the conquered area is “from Kadesh-barnea to Gaza” (Jos 10:41). Joshua destroyed all the Anakim in the land, but some remained in Gaza and other Philistine cities (11:22). Another ancient people, the Avvim, “who lived in villages as far as Gaza,” were annihilated and replaced by the Caphtorim from Caphtor, or Crete (Dt 2:23). Gaza, along with its towns and villages, was listed among the tribal inheritance of Judah (Jos 15:47). At the time of Joshua’s advanced age, Gaza and the other four cities of the Philistine Pentapolis are said to be among the territories not yet taken (13:3); in Judges 1:18-19, however, it is reported that Judah took it.<\/p>\n<p>During the time of the judges, Midianite raiders swept through Israel, looting and destroying, even as far as Gaza (Jgs 6:4). In this period the main biblical interest in Gaza centers in the life and exploits of Samson. Philistine women were Samson’s weakness. He went to Gaza and found a prostitute with whom he had relations (16:1). The people of Gaza learned that he was there and determined to kill him in the morning, but Samson arose at midnight and went to the gate of the city, took the doors, posts, and the bar of the gate and carried them to the top of a hill facing Hebron.<\/p>\n<p>His involvement with another Philistine woman, Delilah, resulted in his capture by the Philistines, who gouged out his eyes and took him to Gaza (Jgs 16:21), where he was bound and forced to grind at a mill in the prison. On a festival day in the temple of Dagon, the reveling worshipers called for Samson to be brought so they could make sport of him. His strength was returning, and God answered his prayer for vengeance. Samson dislodged the two pillars that were the support of the stone slab roof of the pagan temple, so Samson died, along with a great number of Gazites.<\/p>\n<p>Gaza is named as the southern boundary of Israel during the time of Solomon, who ruled over “all the region west of the Euphrates from Tiphsah to Gaza” (1 Kgs 4:24). Hezekiah defeated the Philistines as far as Gaza (2 Kgs 18:8). When he rebelled against Assyria, Sennacherib came and took 46 of Hezekiah’s cities and gave them to the king of Gaza and two other kings.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 47 records a prophecy against the Philistines, which the Lord gave to the prophet before Pharaoh attacked Gaza (v 1; cf. v 5; see Neco above). Amos gives specific prophecies of judgment against Gaza (Am 1:6-7). Zephaniah also states that Gaza would be deserted (Zep 2:4). Zechariah 9 gives an oracle of judgment in which it is said that Gaza will suffer and that its king shall perish.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT there is only one reference to Gaza (Acts 8:26). Philip, who was preaching in Samaria, was told by an angel to go south to “the road that goes from Jerusalem to Gaza.” Here he met the treasurer of Cush, who was reading Isaiah 53 as he rode in his chariot. Philip preached the gospel to this man and baptized him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Philistia, Philistines.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GAZA City near the Palestinian coast, about 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) west-southwest of Jerusalem. It has been occupied almost continuously since ancient times; modern Gaza has played an important part in the conflict between Arabs and Israelis. Gazite and Gazathite are biblical names for the residents of the town. Set about midpoint of the length of the plain of Philistia, Gaza was a rich agricultural area where wheat and similar grains flourished. Situated some three miles (4.8 kilometers)...","summary_en":"GAZA City near the Palestinian coast, about 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) west-southwest of Jerusalem. It has been occupied almost continuously since ancient times; modern Gaza has played an important part in the conflict between Arabs and Israelis. Gazite and Gazathite are biblical names for the residents of the town. Set about midpoint of the length of the plain of Philistia, Gaza was a rich agricultural area where wheat and similar grains flourished. Situated some three miles (4.8 kilometers)...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14491,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Goshen","title_en":"Goshen","content_ro":"<h3>GOSHEN<\/h3>\n<li>1. Geographical region in Egypt occupied by the Israelites during their sojourn in Egypt from the time of Joseph to the exodus. Genesis 46–47 gives us several pieces of information concerning Goshen: (a) It was a definite part of Egypt. (b) It was the place where Joseph met his father after their years of separation, when Jacob moved his family to Egypt. (c) It was an area good for grazing flocks. Goshen has been associated with Egyptian bull cults and was important for animal husbandry. At one period the princes of Thebes sent their cattle to the Delta for pasture, even though it was controlled by the Hyksos. Sacred cattle were probably pastured there by Egyptians also. (d) It is called “the best of the land” in two different verses (Gn 47:6, 11) and is identified as the “land of Rameses.” (e) It probably had a military outpost on its eastern border and may not have been heavily inhabited by Egyptians.<\/li>\n<p>The name Goshen is not of Egyptian origin but is Semitic and attests to the occupation of the region by Semites before the New Kingdom of Egypt. The Septuagint reads “Gesem of Arabia” instead of “land of Goshen” in Genesis 45:10 and 46:34. Ptolemy the geographer said that Arabia was an Egyptian name for the eastern border of the Nile Delta, and this would account for the terminology of the Septuagint.<\/p>\n<p>Goshen was a region of about 900 square miles (1,448.1 square kilometers), consisting of the two districts. The western half ran from Zoan to Bubastis, a distance of about 35 miles (56.3 kilometers) from north to south. This district was an irrigated plain containing some of the most fertile land in Egypt. It is about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) wide at the Mediterranean Sea and narrows to about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) between Zagazig and Tell el-Kebir on the south. The eastern sector contains a large desert area between the Nile Plain and the Suez. As it stretches to the south from Daphnai to the Wadi Tumilat, it increases in width to about 40 miles (64.4 kilometers) from east to west. South of this section more desert area stretches to the Suez on the south and from the Bitter Lakes on the east to Heliopolis on the west. The physical arrangement of Goshen is important in determining the route of the exodus. Given the above description, the Wadi Tumilat would have been the most logical route to the Red Sea for people who were driving flocks and herds. The route would have led from the south side of the field of Zoan near Bubastis, east of the edge of the wilderness and the head of the Bitter Lakes.<\/p>\n<li>2. Area in the territory conquered and occupied by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:41, country of Goshen; Jos 11:16, land of Goshen). It was probably in the hill country of Judah between Hebron and the Negev.<\/li>\n<li>3. Town in the territory of Judah (Jos 15:51). It may have been the central city of the district discussed in #2 above, but this is uncertain.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>GOSHEN<\/h3>\n<li>1. Geographical region in Egypt occupied by the Israelites during their sojourn in Egypt from the time of Joseph to the exodus. Genesis 46–47 gives us several pieces of information concerning Goshen: (a) It was a definite part of Egypt. (b) It was the place where Joseph met his father after their years of separation, when Jacob moved his family to Egypt. (c) It was an area good for grazing flocks. Goshen has been associated with Egyptian bull cults and was important for animal husbandry. At one period the princes of Thebes sent their cattle to the Delta for pasture, even though it was controlled by the Hyksos. Sacred cattle were probably pastured there by Egyptians also. (d) It is called “the best of the land” in two different verses (Gn 47:6, 11) and is identified as the “land of Rameses.” (e) It probably had a military outpost on its eastern border and may not have been heavily inhabited by Egyptians.<\/li>\n<p>The name Goshen is not of Egyptian origin but is Semitic and attests to the occupation of the region by Semites before the New Kingdom of Egypt. The Septuagint reads “Gesem of Arabia” instead of “land of Goshen” in Genesis 45:10 and 46:34. Ptolemy the geographer said that Arabia was an Egyptian name for the eastern border of the Nile Delta, and this would account for the terminology of the Septuagint.<\/p>\n<p>Goshen was a region of about 900 square miles (1,448.1 square kilometers), consisting of the two districts. The western half ran from Zoan to Bubastis, a distance of about 35 miles (56.3 kilometers) from north to south. This district was an irrigated plain containing some of the most fertile land in Egypt. It is about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) wide at the Mediterranean Sea and narrows to about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) between Zagazig and Tell el-Kebir on the south. The eastern sector contains a large desert area between the Nile Plain and the Suez. As it stretches to the south from Daphnai to the Wadi Tumilat, it increases in width to about 40 miles (64.4 kilometers) from east to west. South of this section more desert area stretches to the Suez on the south and from the Bitter Lakes on the east to Heliopolis on the west. The physical arrangement of Goshen is important in determining the route of the exodus. Given the above description, the Wadi Tumilat would have been the most logical route to the Red Sea for people who were driving flocks and herds. The route would have led from the south side of the field of Zoan near Bubastis, east of the edge of the wilderness and the head of the Bitter Lakes.<\/p>\n<li>2. Area in the territory conquered and occupied by the Israelites under Joshua (Jos 10:41, country of Goshen; Jos 11:16, land of Goshen). It was probably in the hill country of Judah between Hebron and the Negev.<\/li>\n<li>3. Town in the territory of Judah (Jos 15:51). It may have been the central city of the district discussed in #2 above, but this is uncertain.<\/li>","summary_ro":"GOSHEN 1. Geographical region in Egypt occupied by the Israelites during their sojourn in Egypt from the time of Joseph to the exodus. Genesis 46–47 gives us several pieces of information concerning Goshen: (a) It was a definite part of Egypt. (b) It was the place where Joseph met his father after their years of separation, when Jacob moved his family to Egypt. (c) It was an area good for grazing flocks. Goshen has been associated with Egyptian bull cults and was important for animal husbandr...","summary_en":"GOSHEN 1. Geographical region in Egypt occupied by the Israelites during their sojourn in Egypt from the time of Joseph to the exodus. Genesis 46–47 gives us several pieces of information concerning Goshen: (a) It was a definite part of Egypt. (b) It was the place where Joseph met his father after their years of separation, when Jacob moved his family to Egypt. (c) It was an area good for grazing flocks. Goshen has been associated with Egyptian bull cults and was important for animal husbandr...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":45474,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:41","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:41","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:41<\/strong> This <em>Goshen<\/em> was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From <em>Goshen up to Gibeon<\/em> describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:41<\/strong> This <em>Goshen<\/em> was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From <em>Goshen up to Gibeon<\/em> describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:41 This Goshen was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From Goshen up to Gibeon describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.","summary_en":"10:41 This Goshen was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From Goshen up to Gibeon describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73100,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:41","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:41","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:41<\/strong> This <em>Goshen<\/em> was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From <em>Goshen up to Gibeon<\/em> describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:41<\/strong> This <em>Goshen<\/em> was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From <em>Goshen up to Gibeon<\/em> describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:41 This Goshen was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From Goshen up to Gibeon describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.","summary_en":"10:41 This Goshen was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From Goshen up to Gibeon describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100726,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:41","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:41","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:41<\/strong> This <em>Goshen<\/em> was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From <em>Goshen up to Gibeon<\/em> describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:41<\/strong> This <em>Goshen<\/em> was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From <em>Goshen up to Gibeon<\/em> describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:41 This Goshen was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From Goshen up to Gibeon describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.","summary_en":"10:41 This Goshen was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From Goshen up to Gibeon describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128352,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:41","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:41","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:41<\/strong> This <em>Goshen<\/em> was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From <em>Goshen up to Gibeon<\/em> describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:41<\/strong> This <em>Goshen<\/em> was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From <em>Goshen up to Gibeon<\/em> describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:41 This Goshen was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From Goshen up to Gibeon describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.","summary_en":"10:41 This Goshen was not the region in Egypt’s Nile delta (Gen 47:27) but a town in the hill country (Josh 15:51) south of Jerusalem. From Goshen up to Gibeon describes the eastern reach of Joshua’s southern campaign.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"42":[{"id":20785,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"43":[{"id":45475,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:43","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:43<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> and his <em>army<\/em> were free to return <em>to their camp at Gilgal<\/em> in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:43<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> and his <em>army<\/em> were free to return <em>to their camp at Gilgal<\/em> in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:43 Joshua and his army were free to return to their camp at Gilgal in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.","summary_en":"10:43 Joshua and his army were free to return to their camp at Gilgal in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73101,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:43","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:43<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> and his <em>army<\/em> were free to return <em>to their camp at Gilgal<\/em> in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:43<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> and his <em>army<\/em> were free to return <em>to their camp at Gilgal<\/em> in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:43 Joshua and his army were free to return to their camp at Gilgal in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.","summary_en":"10:43 Joshua and his army were free to return to their camp at Gilgal in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":100727,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:43","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:43<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> and his <em>army<\/em> were free to return <em>to their camp at Gilgal<\/em> in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:43<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> and his <em>army<\/em> were free to return <em>to their camp at Gilgal<\/em> in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:43 Joshua and his army were free to return to their camp at Gilgal in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.","summary_en":"10:43 Joshua and his army were free to return to their camp at Gilgal in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128353,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Iosua 10:43","title_en":"Study Note: Iosua 10:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>10:43<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> and his <em>army<\/em> were free to return <em>to their camp at Gilgal<\/em> in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>10:43<\/strong> <em>Joshua<\/em> and his <em>army<\/em> were free to return <em>to their camp at Gilgal<\/em> in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"10:43 Joshua and his army were free to return to their camp at Gilgal in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.","summary_en":"10:43 Joshua and his army were free to return to their camp at Gilgal in the Jordan Valley and turn their thoughts to the northern region of Canaan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Iosua 10
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse
Muzică de relaxareSelectează o piesă
0:00
Redare audio
0 piese
🍪 Folosim cookie-uri
Folosim cookie-uri esențiale pentru funcționarea platformei și cookie-uri de analiză pentru a îmbunătăți experiența ta.
Află mai multe
✝️
Logosasistentul Biserica Online
✝️
Bine ai venit! 👋
Sunt Logos, prietenul tău spiritual. Începe conversația — te ascult cu drag! ✨