Contradiction with Judges 1:27
This verse contradicts Joshua 11:23 by stating that the Israelites did not drive out all the inhabitants of the land, specifically mentioning that the Canaanites were not expelled from certain areas.
Judges 1:27: 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 1:28
It highlights that when Israel became strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor but did not drive them out completely, contradicting the full possession claimed in Joshua 11:23.
Judges 1:28: And it came to pass, when Israel was strong, that they put the Canaanites to tribute, and did not utterly drive them out.
Contradiction with Judges 2:1-3
An angel of the Lord states that the Israelites did not obey God's command to make no covenant with the land's inhabitants or destroy their altars, implying incomplete conquest.
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 Judges 2:21-23
God decides not to drive out nations that Joshua left, further suggesting Joshua’s conquest was not as complete as described in Joshua 11:23.
Judges 2:21-23: I also will not henceforth drive out any from before them of the nations which Joshua left when he died:
Contradiction with Joshua 13:1
The Lord tells Joshua there is still very much land to possess, indicating an incomplete conquest compared to Joshua 11:23’s statement of total possession.
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]
Paradox #1
Theological Conflict: Joshua 11:23 suggests that Joshua took the whole land and there was peace, but other parts of the Bible indicate ongoing battles and land not yet conquered. This can seem inconsistent because it implies complete conquest was achieved, contradicting passages that mention remaining enemies and later conflicts.
Paradox #2
One potential doctrinal inconsistency with Joshua 11:23 could be the complete conquest and possession of the land by the Israelites, which seems to conflict with other parts of the Bible where it is shown that not all land was conquered, and some inhabitants still remained. This can be seen in other verses that indicate ongoing battles or incomplete conquests by the Israelites in the land.
Paradox #3
The potential contradiction with this verse is that it states Joshua took control of the entire land of Canaan, which seems to contradict other parts of the Bible, like in the Book of Judges. In Judges, there are accounts of continued battles against Canaanite groups, suggesting not all the land was conquered at that time. This inconsistency raises questions about the timing and completeness of the conquest described.