The Book of Joshua

Abstract

"Continuing discussions about the relationship of Joshua to the archaeological findings at sites such as Tell es-Sultan (Jericho), et-Tell (Ai), el- Jib (Gibeon), and Hazor require additional clarification, since some vital issues have not been adequately considered. One of the problematic issues discussed in my previous article is the use of nonwidence? For example, J. Maxwell Miller has used the nonevidence of the archaeological excavations at et-Tell to conclude that the biblical story is erroneous? The use of nonevidence is methodologically unsound and, therefore, says more about the present state of archaeological interpretation than it does about the biblical story. In addition to the use of nonevidence, three other fundamental issues that need to be probed due to commonly suggested conclusions about biblical stories are site identification, the predictive nature of archaeology, and the question, "Can archaeology prove the Bible?""