The Book of

JOSHUA

Marten H. Woudstra

William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company

Grand Rapids, Michigan

Copyright © 1981 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
255 Jefferson Ave. SE, Grand Rapids, Mich. 49503

All rights reserved

Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data

Woudstra, Marten H.
The Book of Joshua.
(New international Commentary on the Old Testament)
Bibliography: p. 44.
Includes index.
1. Bible. O. T. Joshua—Commentaries.
I. Bible. O. T. Joshua. English. Woudstra.
1981. II. Title, III. Series.
BS1295.3. W68 222´.2077 80-23413
ISBN 0-8028-2525-7

To the Memory of my Parents:
Jan WOUDSTRA (1883–1957)
and
Adriana GOODIJK (1880–1951)

AUTHOR’S PREFACE

The invitation to write this commentary was received many years ago. Heavy involvement in other major projects, such as the preparation of the New International Version, prevented a speedy completion of the work. A choice had to be made between Bible translation, itself a form of Bible exposition, and Bible commentary. The commentary took precedence part of the time, but at other times the translation simply had to take priority.

A well-known French OT scholar, upon hearing that I was preparing a commentary on the book of Joshua, told me the task would not be an easy one. In the course of these many years I have had ample opportunity to experience the truthfulness of that remark. OT studies today are in a state of flux as never before. There is a great variety of opinion concerning almost any matter of importance. The book of Joshua seems to be at the crossroads of this animated discussion. Deep-seated differences in the scholarly world surface in the many studies devoted to this book.

Throughout this work it has been the writer’s objective to take account of the various viewpoints concerning a given issue and to benefit from them where possible. But there were also occasions where disagreement was called for. This disagreement was sometimes of a fundamental sort, especially in matters regarding revelation, inspiration, and the implications of biblical theism for scientific endeavor. Nevertheless, an attempt has been made to carry on some dialogue with those whose opinions were reviewed. My only regret is that this could not be done more. The impasse in which OT scholarship often finds itself could perhaps become less severe if scholars were able to listen to each other more. It is my hope that in presenting divergent opinions I have been fair. If this may not always be evident, because of the brevity of the comments made, I hereby express my sincere regrets. Too much is at stake in this area of biblical interpretation. We are all equally involved in this challenging task. Nevertheless, the scholarly differences that exist are often of such magnitude that an early solution cannot be expected.

When work on the commentary began, I was not necessarily expecting much evidence of structure and design in the book of Joshua. However, as the work progressed, I thought I discovered various instances ...