1

OLD TESTAMENT IN THE PHILIPPINE CONTEXT

Eighth Week

Unit V. The Twelve Books of History in the English Bible

Sub-Unit 1. Triumphant Voices in the Promised Land

(The Books of Joshua, Judges and Ruth)

Objectives: At the end of the lesson, the students are expected to:
*describes the occupation of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants
*describes the troubled times in Israel as they struggled before the people had a king and a central
government
*to know the story of love and loyalty during the time of the Judges

Our lesson this week is found in the Dr. Capulong’s book especially in chapter 9, pages 89 to 103
and entitled “Triumphant Voices in the Promised Land.”
This chapter deals with the stage in the history of Israel which opens the second major division of
the Jewish canon, the Prophets (or Nebhiim). The materials from hereon, that is, starting with the book of
Joshua reflect the traditions of Israel believed to have been recorded primarily from the perspective of the
prophets if not composed by the prophets themselves. This is the reason why it has such label.
One identifiable bloc of materials containing a discernible pattern and theology derived from the
prophetic standpoint is the bloc of historical narratives which cover the books of Joshua, Judges, 1-2
Samuel and 1-2 Kings. As one collection of prophetically inspired and composed materials, it is labeled by
scholars as the Deuteronomistic history. It is called as such since it is believed to have been strongly
influenced by the theological framework and standpoint originating from the book of Deuteronomy.
Israel’s occupation of the land of Canaan represents a decisive culminating point in the history of
the nation. Theologically, it signifies the fulfillment of God’s promised of the gift of land to the people as
originally declared to Abraham (Gen. 12:1). The coming into the land therefore is basically understood by
Israel as an act of God’s grace towards them. The gift of land may need also to be seen in the light of the
historical factors and the general setting against which the event took place.
There could indeed be both internal as well as external historical factors that had contributed in
facilitating the Israelite takeover and occupation of the Promised Land. The external factors would be
referring to the international political situation in the region at the time especially among the major
imperial powers while the internal factors would be referring to the Canaanite sociopolitical situation
itself along with the internal dynamics taking place within the community of Israel.
The Geopolitics of the Fertile Crescent
The international political situation in the area of the Ancient Near East at about the fourteenth
and thirteenth centuries BCE has been characterized by the shifting of fortunes on the part of the ancient
centers of power in the area, both in the Nile Delta and in the Mesopotamian plain. Egypt,
uncharacteristically, had gone into a period of critical political weakness and decline owing to a shift in
focus of the leadership of the empire starting with the inauguration of the reign of Pharaoh Amenhotep
IV. It was under his leadership that a radical religious revolution took place in the empire. This led to the
growing de-emphasis on the political and military governance of the controlled territories in the areas of
Canaan and Syria. The king then was said to be more interested in the promotion of a new religion, that
of the sun-disc god Aton (in place of the traditional state-religion of the god Amon) rather than in the
expansion and consolidation of his empire.
With the rise of the administration of Amenhotep (who later changed his name to Akhnaton,
meaning, the “Splendor of the god Aton” to signify his total conversion to this new religion), the political
and military configurations in the area of Canaan and Syria began to undergo a radical change. With the
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Sem (2020-2021) OLD TESTAMENT IN PHIL. CONTEXT Rev. Daniel B Abogado, Jr.
 2

growing inability of the Egyptian crown to control its city-state vassal-territories in Canaan and Syria a
number of the city-states began to experience political instability. This was marked by the uprising of the
citizens especially the most marginalized and oppressed ones. And this was aided and abetted by the
rising number of incursions or raids in the city-state territories by a bandit-like group, called the “Apirus.”
These Apirus could also be among the displaced peasants in the various territories of Canaan. As a
result there were sporadic occasions of uprisings and revolts as well as raids in various cities all over
Canaan and Syria. Such period of turbulence is often described by scholars as the “Amarna Age.” This
refers to the time when a great number of correspondence of the various Canaanite kings were sent to
the Pharaoh in the city which now has the modern name of Tell El Amarna in upper in upper Nile. The
letters asked for immediate military reinforcements to help quash the unrest they were having in their
respective territories.
Egypt then went through a steady decline in its political fortunes especially in the areas of Canaan
and Syria. Such decline, had been momentarily arrested by the rise to power of a new dynasty in Egypt
which featured the more familiar figures of Seti I and Rameses II, the Pharaohs during the time of Moses
and the Exodus. The renewed power and clout of Egypt however was seriously and vigorously challenged
by another expansionist state from Asia Minor, the Hittites. The territories of Canaan, Syria and even
Phoenicia became hotly contested and prized possessions for the two conquering nations in major battles
against each other. Their continuing war of attrition through the years exhausted the energies of both
powers and they eventually settle their conflict through a peace treaty between Rameses II and the Hittite
king, then, Hattusilis.
By the time of Rameses II’s son, Merneptah, the threat from this new group of invaders only
known as the “sea peoples” became more pronounced. One particular group of this “sea peoples” who
landed in the shores of Canaan bore the name “Perasata or Pelasata,” i.e. the Philistines, from whom the
later name of Canaan—Palestine would be derived.

The Sociopolitical Context of Canaan

Internally, the land and the people of Canaan may be considered also as relatively ripe for a
revolutionary change in their sociopolitical system. For the peasant population of most of the city-states
in the land must have been longing already for some liberating change to take place in their situation. The
taxes imposed by the city-state king must have been too oppressive already. For such taxes must have
involved forced extraction of surplus produce of the people both for the maintenance and support of the
state bureaucracy of the city-state including its own military organization as well as for the payment of the
required tribute for the Egyptian crown. The extraction could also be in the form of huge amounts of rent
imposed on those peasants who are tilling the king’s own estates.
The peasant citizens were further subjected to exploitation by the king’s officials who have
become recipients of substantial favors from their master. In the process they were able to extend loans
at usurious interests to the desperate farmers. The people of Canaan could have easily welcomed and
allied themselves with any group offering liberation from such an oppressed status in the land. Joshua
and his men must have been extended all the cooperation by the people of the land in their attempt to
take over the territory.
When Joshua and his group arrived in the land, they found the conditions of the peasant
population ripe for such revolutionary change and takeover. What must had happened in the process was
an expression of a political withdrawal from the reigning petty tyrants of the city-states and the system
they represented. This involved transfer of allegiance and identity to a new group who were coming in
from the desert with a religion all their own.

The Nature of the Takeover as Gleaned through the Biblical Evidence

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Sem (2020-2021) OLD TESTAMENT IN PHIL. CONTEXT Rev. Daniel B Abogado, Jr.
 3

Several stories in both the books of Joshua and Judges may be considered as indicative of such a
critical situation in the land. There is the story of the harlot Rahab in Joshua 2 as a prelude to the story of
the conquest of Jericho (Jos. 5:13-6:27). There is also, the story of the Gibeonites seeking the help of
Joshua in resisting the aggression of the Canaanite kings against them in Joshua 9—10. There is even the
story of the unidentified native of Bethel showing to the Israelites led by the Joseph tribes the way into
the city prior to its being put to the sword in Judges 1:22-25. Even the event of the renewal of the
covenant in Joshua 24 in the city of Shechem, a place which was never listed among the towns conquered
by Joshua in a place which was never listed among the towns conquered by Joshua in Joshua 11-12 and
Judges 1, becomes very significant in light of such information. This means that Israel was able to hold its
first general assembly of all the people in a city that was not reported to have been conquered at all.
This may actually point to the fact that there were indeed places in Canaan such as Shechem
where whole populations simply defected to the side of Joshua. These were peasant population of the
land who welcomed the coming oof Israel to their city. Thus, Shechem became one of the cities taken
over by Israel even though it was not actually conquered by force.

Rahab and Her Role in the Israelite Takeover of the Land

Rahab herself, as a prostitute breadwinner and supporting an apparently expanded family living in
a rundown house built into the city wall of Jericho (Jos. 2:15) could very well represent the class of the
most marginalized sectors in the Canaanite city-states such as Jericho. “Her ‘profession’ as a harlot places
her among the most debased and vulnerable ‘expendables’ of an agrarian city. . .” Her very situation of
being a prostitute in the midst of an ancient agrarian-feudal economy of the city-state indicates the
intense degree of suffering and deprivation citizens like her were suffering from. The situation appears to
be simply going from bad to worse especially in the wake of the oppressive extractive policies of the king
and the devastating effects of the debt instrument upon lowly peasant citizens.
Rahab’s family could easily have been among the former peasants who lost the land they were
tilling due to royal confiscation the moment they failed to pay the required taxes. Or, they could have
succumbed to the exploitative practices of the city usurers who had been taking advantage of the crop
failures of the indebted farmers due to the frequent occurrence of natural calamities such as famine,
drought and locust infestation. They were then just too happy to foreclose and take control of the farms
of the poor farmers.
In a society that has remained predominantly patriarchal and where women were always
considered properties owned and controlled by men the kind of role and feat attributed to Rahab
represents no less than a radical breakthrough in itself against the prevailing sociocultural consciousness
at the time. Not only did Rahab save her family and secure for them a better future (Jos. 2:12). She also
saved the two spies from the soldiers of the king of Jericho who were looking for them (Jos. 2:3-6). By her
act of insuring the safety of the two spies in her own house, she also insured the success of the Isralite
people’s takeover of the land from its feudal lords.
The coming of the forces of Joshua after crossing the river of Jordan in Joshua 3 represents the
initial stimulus for the change which the whole land had been waiting for so long already. Such initial
force then was met and welcomed and joined by a much larger retinue of local citizens of each city-state
territory conquered by Joshua. This is the class of people represented by the likes of Rahab and her
family, the Gibeonites and the man from Bethel.
Clearly most of the citizens who supported or joined the forces of Joshua belonged to the class of
the peasants. In joining forces with Joshua their goal became one with the very goal of Israel’s. That is, to
gain into and have control of the land. The peasants were all hungry for land that they wanted to till as
their own while Israel wanted to take over the territory in fulfillment of the promise of God to Abraham.
Thus, the whole struggle in Canaan understandably took on the character of an agrarian war. This
is a war for the control of productive lands and fertile territory. But since the lands of Canaan were
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Sem (2020-2021) OLD TESTAMENT IN PHIL. CONTEXT Rev. Daniel B Abogado, Jr.
 4

controlled and owned by the respective city-state kings, the war also took on the character of a political
upheaval intended to depose or remove the king in the territory.

On Jericho and the Collapse of its Walls

It may be interesting to note that even in the much later account of the conquest of the Jericho in
Joshua 6 which is described in terms of the rituals of the holy war tradition, the very same liberational
thrust of the story emerges. The blowing of the ram’s horn (yobel) by the priests to signal the start of the
attack is very significant in the symbolic message it proclaims (Jos. 6:1-11,13,16,21). For the horn (yobel)
is the very same instrument used by the priests in signaling the start of the year of the Jubilee (Lev. 25:8-
10).
This is the time when the most dramatic change in the society of Israel is supposed to take place.
That is, when the lands are supposed to be returned to their original owners, when debts are supposed to
be canceled, when slaves are supposed to be freed, and when the land is supposed to be given its rest.
The incessant blowing of the “yobel” by the priests was then followed by the tremendous shout of the
people. With this blowing and shouting the walls of Jericho collapsed.
The blowing of the horns is clearly meant to signal not just a call for a militant and popular struggle
to commence. It also signals the start of a truly new era that is emerging in the land. This will be an era,
an age when an entirely new system of managing the land and organizing and leading the people will be
experienced. This will be an era when the peasants will finally be given full access to the land they till,
when their debts will be canceled and when they can finally enjoy freedom and prosperity in the land
assigned to them. Thus, the blowing of the horns signals the radical rejection and collapse of an old and
decaying authoritarian and feudalistic system and the ushering in of an entirely new and liberating one.

The Ceremony at Shechem

The accounts in Joshua reflect a definite theological consciousness, that of the Deuteronomistic
Historian who was responsible for the block of narratives comprising the accounts from Joshua to Second
Kings. It is a theological perspective reflecting the consciousness of being a special, chosen people, the
consciousness of a people destined for a significant historical role in the scheme of God’s plan. Such
historical role is then expressed in the concept of thecovenant between Yahweh and Israel whose formal
renewal took place in the northern city of Shechem as recorded in Joshua 24.
In this renewal of the covenant ceremony, Joshua, now standing as the able successor of Moses,
challenged the people to a life of undivided loyalty to the one God who brought them to this land. This
loyalty is then to be expressed in their faithful adherence to the covenant laws and their ethical demands.
Such adherence is to be seen as the key to the success or failure of their effort to establish a truly just,
free and God-fearing community with its own distinct identity and dignity vis-à-vis the other nations.
Joshua’s challenge to the people can be appreciated against the background of other dominant
religions and popular deities (the Baals) proliferating in the land they had just entered. Some of these
religions were representing the gods whom Israel’s ancestors had worshipped before in Mesopotamia
(the region “beyond the River’) and in Egypt (Jos 24:14,15).
The ceremony at Shechem also marks the birth of a new sociopolitical arrangement in the land of
Canaan, where the tribes of Israel now agree to live together in unity and as a community bound together
by a common religious conviction welded together by common political challenges. These are religions
and deities very much identified with the oppressive system of slavery and inequality from which Israel
had been liberated by Yahweh and which Israel is mandated never again to return to. But most of all, this
Tribal Confederacy, as it is commonly referred to by scholars, represents a basic political intention fueled
by the zeal of a liberating faith to build an alternative community of free and prosperous and Yahweh
fearing people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Sem (2020-2021) OLD TESTAMENT IN PHIL. CONTEXT Rev. Daniel B Abogado, Jr.
 5

This is also a community where the levers of power were not to be concentrated in the hands of
just one human ruler or king as in Egypt and other monarchies in the region. Rather, power is actually to
be shared among the tribes through the leadership exercised by the elders and the judges. This is where
no human being is to be considered a king or made politically dominant over the rest of the people. But
this is where everyone is given the opportunity to have equal access to the only one King, Yahweh whom
Israel would have to acknowledge through worship from hereon.
The ceremony at the old city of Shechem, a city identified even with the ancestors, (cf. Gen. 34)
may also be seen as a gathering of a highly expanded community with new and varied compositions
already (Jos. 24). There could be at least two major groups now composing the community that is being
formally established at Shechem. First, there is now the new generation of those who really came in from
the desert and whose roots could really be traced back to the days of oppression in Egypt. These are the
sons and daughters of the group who originally went out of Egypt led by Moses. To this group, who may
still have the memories of what they and their parents experienced in the desert and also in Egypt, the
ceremony at Shechem comes as a call to renew and reaffirm their covenant commitment to Yahweh. This
was a commitment originally accepted by their parents earlier in Sinai but which they now need to
reaffirm themselves as a new generation.
The second group could be the more interesting one to watch. For, this is the group comprising of
the new converts to the faith and to the alternative community which Israel represents. This could
include people belonging to the marginalized sector of the Canaanite society such as the household of the
harlot Rahab, the Gibeonites and most probably the people of Shechem. These are the people looking for
and longing for a truly alternative community, social system and a religion they can consider sympathetic
to their oppressed situation. For them, the event at Shechem served as their initiation to the new
community they have freely chosen to belong.
From here on, this group will become identified with the same faith traditions by which Israel was
born. They will be bound to and will appropriate for themselves the same history and the same covenant
obligations into which the community has entered. At the same time, this group will also clearly illustrate
the fact that the community of Israel that emerged in the land of Canaan is a community of Israel that
emerged in the land of Canaan is a community of people not necessarily bound together by blood or kin
or ethnic relations.

ON JUDGES I
The account of the takeover of land as recorded in Judges 1 appears different from that narrated
in Joshua 6-12. Instead of a picture of a centralized, unified military action of the people led by Joshua,
what appears is a picture of disparate incidents of a tribe-by-tribe occupation of the land. Each tribe was
led by its own tribal leader as Caleb and Othniel were the ones providing leadership for the tribe of Judah
and their clans. Each tribe then settled in the area which it was able to occupy. This is unlike the story of
Joshua 13-21 where the land was apportioned to each of the tribes and clans after the takeover and
mainly through the authority of Joshua.
The picture given in Judges I also gives a much stronger impression that the takeover of the land
was not really a completed process, (Jdg. 1:19, 21, 27, 29ff. cf. Jos. 13:1; 17:16). For in many instances the
tribes were never really able to dislodge the native Canaanites from their fortified settlements. Since the
material of Judges is believed to be composed of much older materials than those in Joshua, the accounts
in Judges 1 then may be reflecting a much broader basis for interpreting what really happened. What is
being made clear here is that there was actually no wholesale slaughter of the Canaanites by the
Israelites. This was also hinted at by the accounts in Joshua in spite of the image of a wholesale
extermination they project where supposedly only all the kings were the ones captured and put to death
(cf. Jos. 10:42; 11:17-18). Neither was there any forcible expulsion from the land much unlike the
impression being given by the highly nationalistic minded writer of the Joshua accounts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Sem (2020-2021) OLD TESTAMENT IN PHIL. CONTEXT Rev. Daniel B Abogado, Jr.
 6

The people of the different tribes in cooperation with the defecting natives appeared to have
engaged in an almost spontaneous attempt to take over the land primarily from those who controlled it.
As soon as the people were able to acquire such control through their own military offensives, they just
allowed the rest of the population of the area to live with them in a peaceful coexistence. This somehow
provides a modified reinforcement to the theory of an internal unrest that triggered the whole popular
movement for radical change. The central military leadership of Joshua is not given any attention at all.
But the focus is solely on the individual initiatives of each tribe. This makes the whole struggle more of a
grassroots phenomenon but with a wide territorial scope even before any semblance of a centralized
leadership can emerge.

Theological Implications
Usually it is the issue and question of violence which is triggered when this stage in the history of
Israel is examined in church circles today. Many find it hard to accept a series of accounts that may
appear to justify the use of violence in the pursuit of a desired social change. Many also find it difficult to
reconcile their traditional view of God with the kind of divine image that has emerged from these stories.
For the image of God as a warrior God who makes use of revolutionary violence in order to provide a
people with their own land is something quite contrary to our usual understanding of the nature of our
God.
We may need to reflect further on the implications of the claim that God indeed does take sides.
For this taking side of God understandably has to have a particular historical and concrete expression in
order for it to be experienced by the people whose side God has taken. In a situation of extreme social
distortion and disparities characterized and maintained by unjust practices by those who benefit from
such, God has decided to intervene in the most concrete way possible. The community that is now Israel
has actually undergone two experiences of such extreme distortion and injustice, the experience in Egypt
and that in Canaan for the natives who were converted. In both of these experiences God acted so
decisively and unequivocally that no room whatsoever was left that will make people still doubt the
earnest commitment of this God to the people.
Freedom, prosperity, justice, and equality in an acutely divided and oppressed society cannot just
be handed over on a silver platter by those who have the monopoly of these ideals. Fortunately, these
ideals are part of the whole package given by God to Israel when they were brought out of Egypt.
Freedom can only be attained and affirmed in a context where oppression, no matter how
dominant, is rejected with all the power and commitment of those who are victimized by it. Prosperity
can only be experience in a context where monopoly control that creates mass poverty is condemned
outright by those who are deprived and impoverished as a result of such monopoly. Justice can only be
real in a context where truth and fairness, and not might are proclaimed and witnessed to in spite of the
risks involved. Equality can only be enjoyed in a context where domination of a few over the many is
resisted with all the spiritual and moral energies by the people affected and marginalized by such
domination. In short, the realization of the divine will for God’s people cannot avoid going through the
hard and painful historical process of its being fought for and struggled for by the very people who have
all the right to receive and enjoy them but are systematically denied of such.
The struggle for land by Israel is part of her struggle for freedom, prosperity, justice, and equality.
It is a struggle that will serve as the culmination of the liberating act of God that started in Egypt.
Certainly an oppressed people struggling for freedom and justice can find much comfort in this
story of Israel’s takeover of the land. It becomes a concrete expression of how God can act not just free
people from enslaving conditions. For this God can also empower and enable an oppressed people to
struggle with earnest faith for what has been graciously accorded them. This can easily constitute a
radical message of hope for such kind and class of people.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Sem (2020-2021) OLD TESTAMENT IN PHIL. CONTEXT Rev. Daniel B Abogado, Jr.
 7

On the other hand, this should be taken too as a warning to those who remain complacent and
insensitive from their positions of power and privilege in society to heed the call for meaningful change.
Otherwise, the prospect of being counted among the Canaanite rulers and their cohorts may just become
a very real possibility in our present history.

Source/Reference:
Capulong, Noriel Reading & Hearing the Old Testament in Philippine Context Vol. 1; Quezon City: New
Day Publishers C2003 pp. 89-102
Quotable in the Book of Joshua:
“The priests blew their trumpets. . . . the soldiers shouted as loud as they could. The walls of Jericho fell
flat” (6:20).
“Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve. . . . As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord”
(24:15, NKJV). Part of the elderly Joshua’s farewell to Israel.
Starring Roles:
Joshua, leader and military commander of the Israelites (1:1)
Rahab, a Jericho prostitute who hid two Israelite spies (2:1)
Achan, Israelite whose gree cost his nation a battle (7:1)
Plot:
After escaping from about 400 years in Egypt – much of that in slavery – and wandering 40 years
through the Sinai Desert east of Egypt, the Israelites finally arrive on the border of the land God has
promised them. Their mission: take the land using any necessary force and purge it of the idol-
worshipping people who live there.

Inside Scoop:
Joshua and Jesus share the same name. The name Jesus is a Greek form of the Hebrew name for Joshua,
much like Jacques is the French equivalent of James. Both Joshua and Jesus mean “God saves.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Sem (2020-2021) OLD TESTAMENT IN PHIL. CONTEXT Rev. Daniel B Abogado, Jr.