This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 2-19-09▼Wilderness & Conquest▼Four View or Models▼1 military conquest model/view•defend the basic integrity of the normative biblical model—military success under joshua's leadership actually happened; although, they do believe that joshua was embellished to promote spiritual empowerment▼archaeological support the military model with evidence of some violent destructions in canaan in the city states around the 13th century BCE•Lachish, Hazor, Bethel, Debir, Eglon•deuteronomistic view of the military model is based on this archaelogical evidence•archaelogical evidence doesn't give any information about Joshua's leadership bringing about their conquest▼walled city of Jericho•no archaelogical evidence of a walled city dating from about 1400-1200 BCE (joshua's infilatration was about 1250 BCE). But...•...there is some evidence of a walled city in the middle of the 16th cent BCE•the wall may have fallen due to an earthquake•the wall may have been destoyed before joshua arrived in Jericho▼2 gradual infiltration•joshua's swift conquest is religious imagination of the deuteromimistic historian who sought to stress the influence/guidance of G-d who has give them victory▼3 peasant revolt model•archaeology—No biblical confirmation is possible•emergence of Israel is appealed by a socio-political revolt•aggrivated by laws made by the canannite city states in combination of joshua's arrival produced a peasent revolt\•no archaelogical evidence...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 04/05/2009 for the course RELIGION 840 taught by Professor Pavlin during the Spring '08 term at Rutgers.
- Spring '08