Summarising Whose Promised Land? (5th edition), by Colin Chapman, part of chapter 4.

From Gen 12:1-3 onwards, the promise that Abraham and his descendants will inherit ‘the land’ looms large in the storyline of the Old Testament.

Abraham himself owned just a tiny parcel of land – a field which served as the final resting-place of his wife Sarah (Gen 23:17f).  The conquest of the land would fall to Joshua and others.

This biblical account no doubt resonates with many Israeli Jews today.  But what of those who might be regarded as the successors of the Canaanites – the Palestinian Arabs?  How can we be expected to believe that God actually commanded the conquest?

Accept the reality of what happened.  We must be careful neither to exaggerate nor to minimise the extent of destruction.  For example, only a few cities were actually destroyed.

Resist judging past actions by today’s moral standards.  The rights of the individual (over against the rights of the state) may seem self-evident to us, but they were formulated very recently, and only after much difficulty.  The idea that it is wrong for one people to take over the land of another people by force is recent.  From our modern perspective, the actions of Joshua and the Israelites were reprehensible, and must not be used as examples for people to follow today.  But we need humilty to understand the ethical values by which ancient cultures lived.

The land as a gift.  Scripture  repeatedly states that the land was a gift from the Lord to his people.  See, for example, Lev 25:23.  This was in fulfilment of his promises to Abraham, Deut 1:8.  We can see from this that the land was not an end in itself, but one stage in the unfolding of God’s plan to bless all nations.

The conquest was a means by which God judged its inhabitants.  See Gen 15:16.  Their customs and practices are frequently described as ‘abominations’ and ‘detestable’.  See Lev 18:24-27.

God will be just as severe on his people if they adopt similar practices.  See Lev 18:28.

God’s law to be obeyed.  The gift of the land and the judgment of its inhabitants are linked with an appeal to obey God’s law.  While rejecting all vestiges of Canaanite religion, they are to adopt the new law revealed to Moses.  See Lev 18:30; 19:2; Deut 18:9–15.

Notice how the five themes of the land as a gift, the land and the covenant, judgment (both on the Canaanites and on Israel), and obedience are brought together in Deut 8:19–9:1, 4–6.

Progressive revelation.  The NT makes it clear that God’s revelation in OT times had been gradual and progressive (Heb 1:1f).  It had been adapted and accommodated to what people could understand at the time.   For example, the idea of God as Trinity could only make sense to people who were already convinced monotheists.

For us, who see God’s revelation in Christ as final and complete, we cannot but regard Joshua’s actions with abhorrence.  But God had to work within a culture that saw ethnic cleansing as normal in order to show, in time, a better way.

We may indeed regard Jesus Christ as the new and better Joshua.  The first Joshua led God’s people out of the wilderness and into the promised land.  The Book of Acts may be regarded as the coutner part to the Book of Joshua, showing how the new Joshua leads his people, with good news, out into the entire known world (Acts 1:8).  But the differences are as profound as the similarities.  It is unthinkable that Jesus would lead an army against the Romans, as Joshua led an army against the Canaanites.

It is important, then, for us to read the story of conquest, not simply on its own terms, but in the light of God’s completed revelation in Jesus Christ.