Joshua 10:13 The sun stood still and the moon stood motionless while the nation took vengeance on its enemies. The event is recorded in the Scroll of the Upright One. The sun stood motionless in the middle of the sky and did not set for about a full day.

Various interpretative options are available:-

1. Myth.  Some regard the entire account as an historicised myth or legend.  But this would be to undermine the credibility of the inspired author (NBC).

2. ‘Pure miracle’ view.  At the other end of the scale, some take a literal view of the text, according to which the earth stopped rotating for a period 24 hours, so that both the sun and the moon ceased their apparent motion across the sky.  This is supported by the language used, and especially by the astonished comment in v14.

For R.A. Torrey (Difficulties in the Bible) the text does not say that the sun ‘stood still’, but rather implies that the sun remained visible for an entire period of twenty-four hours.

Torrey adds that a number of ancient sources record a ‘long day’:

‘Herodotus, the great Greek historian, tells us that the priests of Egypt showed him a record of a long day. The Chinese writings state that there was such a day in the reign of their emperor Yeo, who is supposed to have been a contemporary of Joshua. The Mexicans also have a record that the sun stood still for one entire day in the year which is supposed to correspond with the exact year in which Joshua was warring in Palestine.’

It is, of course, impossible to evaluate these claims in the absence of further evidence.

Woudstra (NICOT) inclines towards a literal view without much discussion, and this view is also supported by the Apologetics Study Bible.

Gleason Archer (A Survey of Old Testament Introduction) writes:

‘The words did not hasten seem to point to a retardation of the movement so that the rotation required forty-eight hours rather than the usual twenty-four. In support of this interpretation, research has brought to light reports from Egyptian, Chinese, and Hindu sources of a long day. Harry Rimmer reports that some astronomers have come to the conclusion that one full day is missing in our astronomical calculation. Rimmer states that Professor Pickering of the Harvard Observatory traced this missing day back to the time of Joshua; likewise Dr. Totten of Yale (cf. Ramm, CVSS, p. 159). Ramm reports, however, that he has been unable to find any documentation to substantiate this report.’

Self-styled ‘author, philosopher and apologist’ Robert Clifton Robinson thinks that the phenomenon can be explained by the earth’s rotation slowing by 50%.  ‘Ben, the Amateur Exegete’ exposes the absurdity of this claim, together with evidence of plagiarism on Robinson’s part.

The author of this article has no problem with a straighforwardly literal interpretation:

‘Joshua 10…unequivocally declares that God miraculously lengthened the day so that Joshua’s armies could defeat the Amorites. Nothing in the chapter would suggest that we should read the events recorded in verses 12-14 in a figurative way. Since God is the Creator of every atom in the entire universe, He is able to do whatever He desires. Miracles are no problem for Him. If God orders the sun and moon that He created to stand still, they stand still!’

In fact, it is so difficult to track down evidence for the various claims mentioned above that they appear to partake somewhat of the nature of ‘urban myths’.  See the discussion here, here and here.

No theist would be so bold as to assert that God could not work such a miracle as this, but many doubt that he would do so. In terms of astronomy, the implications would be catastrophic, unless a whole series of other miracles were wrought in order to stabilise the earth and everything on its surface. Even God cannot do things that are nonsense (like making a rope with only one end, or making a square circle), and it may be that to literally stop the earth and moon in their orbits borders on the nonsensical.

Claude Mariottini notes additional problems with the notion that the sun and moon actually stopped still in the sky:

1. This view reflects a pre-Copernican view of the solar system, one in which the sun rotates around the earth.

2. The stopping of the sun in the same place in the sky probably would scorch the land where the light was shining and would freeze the land when there was only darkness.

3. If the sun would stop in the middle of the sky, there would still be day and night because day and night are determined by the rotation of the earth on its axis, not by the rotation of the sun.

3. Miraculous manipulation of light.  Other miraculous, but non-literal, explanations, have been proposed. Ross, for example, thinks that the event should be interpreted as an extra-long night, rather than an extra-long day, and that no adjustments to the orbits of the Sun, Moon, or Earth were entailed:-

‘What the text demands is God bringing an extra period of light or darkness into the Valley of Aijalon. God could have brought about such effects through a supernatural meteorological event that blanketed the region with heavy darkness or refracted or reflected extra light into the desired location. Alternately, God could have shone his Shekinah glory into the Valley of Aijalon or used His “hand” to block out the Sun and Moon’s light.’

Croteau and Yates consider it plausible that there was a ‘supernatural manipulation of light’.  The reference to the sun ‘standing still’ would be phenomenological language describing a refraction of light or some other means whereby God miraculously extended the daylight hours.

But these are mere conjectures, without direct support from the text itself.

4. Solar eclipse.  At first sight, this seems improbable.  Solar eclipses only last a few minutes, and the moon, invisible until it passes across the face of the sun, cannot be said to have ‘stopped’.  In any case, the text clarifies that the sun and the moon were opposite one another in the sky, making an eclipse impossible.

Colin Humphreys and Graeme Waddington, however, think that a reference to a solar eclipse is possible.  Modern English translations have followed the AV in assuming that the Hebrew texts means that the Sun and Moon stopped moving.  But, these authors suggest, the text might mean that they stopped shining.  They calculate that an annular solar eclipse passed directly over the land of Cannan on 30 October 1207 BC.

The moon is invisible for a couple of days either side of a solar eclipse.  This is consistent with the text saying that it stopped shining:

‘As the Israelites used an observationally based lunar calendar they would have been well aware of this monthly period of lunar invisibility and so could have timed their surprise night-time attack at Gibeon to take advantage of the lack of natural night-time illumination at this time.’

Verse 13 states that ‘the sun did not set for about a whole day.’  This has given rise to the idea of ‘Joshua’s long day’.  But it may actually refer to a ‘double dusk’ that would have occurred over Canaan on this day:

‘on this occasion, in the afternoon the light from the Sun on Canaan started decreasing from its normal level at about 15:30 until at about 16:50 it was approximately ten times less intense than normal and dusk set in…However, by around 17:10 the level of illumination would have been somewhat restored before dusk fell again and then the Sun finally set at about 17:38.’

The phrase translated ‘about a whole day’ may mean ‘like a whole day’ or ‘as on a whole day’.

Humphries and Waddington conclude:

‘the description in the book of Joshua of a celestial event in which both the Sun and the Moon stopped shining is consistent with the observation by an ancient Israelite layman of an annular solar eclipse.’

So it may be that this is a miracle of timing, rather than an event in which many of the fundamental laws of physics were suspended.

This interpretation is favoured by the IVP Bible Background Commentary, and also receives tentative support from Hess (TOTC).  It does not solve all the problems in the text.  It does, however, have the considerable merit of taking the text seriously, while offering a credible version of the event.

Incidently, the date proposed for the eclipse – 1207 BC – lends support for the later of two dates proposed for the Exodus (around 1260 BC, as opposed to an alternative, earlier date of 1445 BC.)  A late date is supported, for other reasons, by Kitchen and others.

5. Weather conditions.  Some think that the sun stopped shining, not that it stood still.  The word for ‘stand still’ could, apparently, equally be translated ‘cease’.  This (it is said) was possibly due to the hailstorm, v10, or to the very high clouds that would have produced the hailstorm. The effect of the cooling storm was to enable Joshua and his men to regain their strength on this hot July day and continue fighting for a further 18 hours (but, presumably, the same conditions would have refreshed the Amorites as well).  HSB, for example, concludes that

‘Joshua prayed early in the morning, while the moon was in the western sky and the sun was in the east, that God would intervene on their behalf. God answered Joshua and sent a hailstorm. This had the effect of prolonging the darkness and shielding the men from the searing rays of the summer sun. The sun, therefore, was “silenced” in the middle of the sky, and the moon “did not hasten” to come.’

Although the Hebrew word for the sun ‘going down’ does usually refer to sunset, it sometimes applies to its rising, as in Isa 60:1.

Claude Mariottini understands the Hebrew word translated ‘stand still’ to mean ‘be silent’ (i.e. ‘cease from shining’):

• Joshua engaged the Amorites at night, catching them by surprise;
• A storm prolonged the darkness and produced hail that killed many Amorite soldiers;
• In response to Joshua’s prayer, the storm continued for most of the following day;
• The storm accounts for the fact that more Amorites were killed by the hail than by Joshua’s army.

The same writer adds that the idea that the sun stood still comes, not from Joshua’s prayer, but from the book of Jashar:

Joshua commanded: “Sun, be silent.”

But the writer of the book of Jashar wrote: “The sun stood.”

The book of Jashar is mentioned again in 2 Sam 1:17f.  This dates it some 300 years after the events narrative in the book of Joshua.

Mariottini comments:

‘Had the biblical writer used Joshua’s words only, scholars would not be discussing whether or not the sun stood still, but since he chose to introduce the writings of an unknown writer into the biblical material, scholars now have to deal, not with what happened, but with the interpretation of what happened, an interpretation that was written centuries after the event by someone who was not even an eyewitness of the event. The best interpreter of what happened at the battle of Gibeon is not the writer of the book of Jashar, nor his words, but Joshua and what his words requested.’

Instone-Brewer (Science and the Bible: Insights for an Ancient Text) notes that deadly hailstones would come from a cumulonimbus cloud that was extremely high (up to ten miles in height).  These cloud conditions occurring before and after sunset would cause dusk on that day to be very prolonged: the clouds would darken the sky before sunset and lighten it (by reflecting sunlight) after sunset.

6. Omen.  Walton notes that, given that this took place  at full moon, the sun would have risen in the east – in the direction of Gibeon – just as the moon was setting in the west – in the direction of Aijalon.  Now, middle eastern cultures perceived omens in such phenomena, and they used the terminology of ‘wait’, ‘stand’ and ‘stop’ to describe the relative movements of the sun and moon.  When the moon does not ‘wait’, it means that it sinks below the horizon before the sun rises.  When the moon does ‘wait’ or ‘stand’ this indicates that opposition does occur – and that both the sun and the full moon can be seen, in opposite parts of the sky, at the same time.  Joshua may have been well aware of the Amorites’ superstitious dependence on celestial omens, and this may have led him to pray for the the opposition to occur on an unpropitious day.

Once again, there is no indication in the text itself that an omen was involved.

7. Poetic account.  Croteau and Yates (Urban Legends of the Old Testament) note that in Josh 10:9–12a, we first have a prose account of Israel’s defeat of the Amorite kings, followed, in 12b-13, by a poetic account.  Such a combination of prose and poetry in describing battles of the Israelites is also found in Ex 14-15 and Judges 4-5.  Given that v12b-13 are in the form of poetry, we would expect to find here a heightened and hyperbolic account of a notable victory.  Ancient military accounts often related how enemies were defeated in a single day.  ‘Cosmic’ language is also found in Judges 5:20 and Hab 3:10.

Croteau and Yates conclude that, putting the prose and poetic accounts together, there may have been a supernatural manipulation of light or a miraculous storm with a poetic description.

Refreshingly, many conservative commentators express agnosticism over the precise nature and mechanics of this event.