Denying That the Jericho and Ai Stories Happened?
Considering the Ramifications of That Approach
This post is for paid subscribers. If you’ve been encouraged by the content of this Biblical Theology site, and if you’d like to have complete and unending access to hundreds of archived articles, would you consider supporting this newsletter?
I’m thrilled that my newest book, Walking the Way of the Wise, is now available. You can order it at this link so that it gets to your house ASAP! https://www.amazon.com/Walking-Way-Wise-Biblical-Essential/dp/1514010917/
There are many commentaries on the book of Joshua. As I’ve been preaching through that book at our church, I’ve been consulting some of these resources for sermon prep. And I’ve noticed the occasional comment that makes my jaw drop.
Here’s one that jumped out to me recently. As a writer was commenting on Joshua 7 and the battle with Ai, he wrote, “This is not a story about a literal event any more than the Jericho story was.”
In one sentence, the commentator dismissed the historicity of both the Jericho and Ai stories in Joshua 6 and 7. Those stories had basically been made up by the biblical author. Such an approach to biblical narratives was especially prominent in 18th and 19th century scholarship, when post-Enlightenment assumptions cast doubt on the canonical text and aimed to go “behind” the text to investigate “what really happened.”
Let’s do a thought exercise. What are the ramifications of an approach that calls into question the literal nature of the events in Joshua 6 and 7?
Spoiler: the ramifications are devastating.