www.ArgumentCenter.org - Where hard questions are answered

< OK No. Look at the words more closely.

It says that with God, Judah took over the hill country, but it doesn't explicitly state that with God he couldn't drive out the inhabitants of the valley/plain.

>> No. It's all one thought.

This verse is very clear. It's all one sentence and thought. God is with Judah when he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain and when he could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley. It doesn't say God was only with Judah in his mountain conquest.

< STRONG We have to keep in mind that the Bible writers didn't intend to write stuff that immediately makes no sense.

The authors wouldn't purposely intend to convey God's omnipotence and then make statements that directly contradicted it. It would go against their message entirely. Therefore this verse is not meant to be contradictory and most likely was simply not written clearly.

< STRONG No. God chooses how to use His power.

"If there is an all-powerful God, then he also would have the power to decide when and how and where to use that power. There is no contradiction there. And there is no contradiction in Judges 1:19." Further, even though the omnipotent God was with them, Judah wasn't omnipotent as a result.

 - http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/q16.htm  

>> There is no contradiction if this "God" were evil...

But if you believe in a true and loving, caring and thoughtful God who is all powerful, then yes there is a HUGE CONTRADICTION.

< STRONG No. The Israelites had power to drive out the Canaanites only if they faithfully followed God.

Joshua was informing his listeners that they had the power to drive out the Canaanites only if they would follow God faithfully and be confident in His promises. Judges chapter 2:1-3 says:

Then the Angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said: “I led you up from Egypt and brought you to the land of which I swore to your fathers; and I said, ‘I will never break My covenant with you. And you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land; you shall tear down their altars.’ But you have not obeyed My voice. Why have you done this? Therefore I also said, ‘I will not drive them out before you; but they shall be thorns in your side, and their gods shall be a snare to you.’ ”

God’s promise through Joshua was not an unconditional guarantee that the children of Israel would possess all of the land they had been promised. It was conditional, based upon the faithfulness of the Israelites and their obedience to God’s commandments... [This verse could easily refer to] land that God chose not to clear of its previous inhabitants because of the disobedience of the people of Judah.

As a final word, notice that Joshua said that “the mountain country” and “its farthest extents” were the promised possession of the Israelites. In Judges 1:19, the children of Israel did, indeed, drive out “the inhabitants of the mountains.” Unless we force the phrase “its farthest extents” in Joshua 17:18 to read “lowland” as in Judges 1:19, then there is absolutely no hint of a contradiction, and this entire explanation is unnecessary.

-http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=301

< OK No. Exodus 23:29 indicates that the Lord would not allow the Israelites to conquer the land of Israel too quickly.

Because the Jews did not yet have a large enough population to occupy and maintain the whole land. Therefore they weren't able to defeat the inhabitants of the valley just yet.

>> This creates another contradiction.

Ex 12:37, Num 1:45-46 The number of men of military age who take part in the Exodus is given as more than 600,000. Allowing for women, children, and older men would probably mean that a total of about 2,000,000 Israelites left Egypt. (Larger than the whole population of Egypt at the time).

Other than the fact that we know that isn't true, it is not a contradiction until we see this...

1 Kings 20:15 All the Israelites, including children, number only 7000 at a later time.

< STRONG Keep in mind the context of the history of the population (Biblical).

Consider what happened:  

Ex 32:26,27 "then Moses stood in the gate of the camp and said, "Who is on the LORD's side? Come to me." And all the sons of Levi gathered around him. And he said to them, "Thus says the LORD God of Israel, 'Put your sword on your side each of you, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill his brother and his companion and his neighbor.'"

The population notably decreased from events like this, as well as during conquests. According to the Bible, they literally conquered city after city.

< OK No. It was because the Israelites had fear which caused them to lose.

[A] possible reason could be that the men of Judah allowed their fear to overcome their faith in the Lord. In fact, in Joshua 17:14-18, we see that Joshua is trying to convince his people that they can overcome troops that have iron chariots. In other words, Joshua 17:14-18 is showing us that indeed there was some fear and doubt among the Israelites as to whether they could defeat iron chariots. (Otherwise, Joshua would not have needed to try to convince them that they could).

We see in Deuteronomy 20:1 that the Israelites were not supposed to fear their opposing armies, but to have faith in the Lord instead: "When thou goest forth to battle against thine enemies, and seest horses, and chariots, [and] a people more than thou, thou shalt not be afraid of them; for Jehovah thy God is with thee, who brought thee up out of the land of Egypt."

- http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/q16.htm 

>> To say the ones who died in battle were the ones who allowed their fear to overcome their faith in the Lord is nuts.

Oh well, I guess you died because you didnt have enough faith...sorry! We can't just turn off the emotions that God gave us. If that's true, then God is a sadist who gets his kicks from setting you up for failure then blaming you if you fail.

< STRONG What happens if your soldiers become afraid? They lose strength and lose the battle. 

THIS IS FACT. Remember the movie 300? They said something about conquering fear. We understand the gist of fear. If you have fear in battle, you chicken out... so instead of pulling up your shield to deflect the enemy's sword upfront, you run away with an arrow slung into your back. Fear does kill, and the opposite of fear is faith. 

< OK No. There is a difference between losing a battle and winning a war. So God let them become defeated.

For example, the Lord was with Joseph. But Joseph was sold into slavery. But the Lord later used this "defeat" to save Joseph's brothers. The Lord was certainly with Jesus. But Jesus was crucified. And that might have seemed like a defeat, initially, but instead it was the greatest victory of all time. According to Judges 1:19, the Lord was with the men of Judah. But that doesn't mean that they would immediately defeat the men of the plain with the iron chariots.

- http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/q16.htm  

>> So where is the upshot of losing the battle against the plains people?

What good came out of losing the battle? People died needlessly. Plus, if God wanted the land for the Jews, why not smite their enemies then give them the land? Why kill off his OWN people?

< One explanation is that if you fight for it, you care about it more.

If it's just given to you for free, you take it for granted. Another reason is to test the faith of people. We all know death is the ultimate test of faith.

>> But how are you getting the land if you die? 

< They didn't all die.