Contradiction with Joshua 13:1
This verse mentions that much of the land remained to be possessed, suggesting that Joshua 11:16's claim of conquest is incomplete.
Joshua 13:1: Now Joshua was old [and] stricken in years; and the LORD said unto him, Thou art old [and] stricken in years, and there remaineth yet very much land to be possessed. [to...: Heb. to possess it]
Contradiction with Judges 1:27-28
This verse describes that some Canaanite regions remained unconquered, contradicting Joshua 11:16's assertion of total conquest.
Judges 1:27-28: Neither did Manasseh drive out [the inhabitants of] Bethshean and her towns, nor Taanach and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: but the Canaanites would dwell in that land.
Contradiction with Judges 1:21
This verse states that the Jebusites were not driven out of Jerusalem, which contradicts the complete conquest implied in Joshua 11:16.
Judges 1:21: And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day.
Contradiction with Judges 2:1-3
This verse indicates that God would no longer drive out the inhabitants, suggesting Joshua 11:16 was not entirely fulfilled.
Judges 2:1-3: And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you. [angel: or, messenger]
Contradiction with Joshua 15:63
This verse reveals that the Jebusites could not be driven out from Jerusalem, contradicting the claim of complete land possession in Joshua 11:16.
Joshua 15:63: As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out: but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day.
Paradox #1
There might be a contradiction regarding the extent of territories conquered by Joshua. Some parts of the Bible earlier or later suggest that Israelites did not fully conquer or control all the lands mentioned, indicating differing accounts of territorial control.
Paradox #2
The contradiction or conflict in the context of this verse could be the tension between the ideas of conquest and peace. People may struggle with the ethical implications of using force to take land, which seems to go against the broader message of love and compassion found elsewhere in religious teachings. This tension can be seen as conflicting with the values of mercy and forgiveness.