How does Joshua 11:20 align with the concept of free will? Text And Immediate Context Joshua 11:20 : “For it was the LORD’s purpose to harden their hearts to engage Israel in battle, so that they would be completely destroyed and given no mercy, but would be annihilated, as the LORD had commanded Moses.” The statement occurs in the summary of Joshua’s northern campaign (Joshua 11:1-23). The phrase “it was the LORD’s purpose” (kî mêʾet YHWH) frames the hardening as a deliberate yet judicial act within a broader covenant narrative (cf. Deuteronomy 7:1-2). Historical Background Canaanite polities of the Late Bronze Age were vassals of Egypt and steeped in cultic practices involving infant sacrifice (archaeologically attested at Tel Gezer and Carthaginian parallels). Genesis 15:16 had foretold a 400-year probation until “the iniquity of the Amorites” was full. Thus Joshua 11 is not capricious aggression but the execution of a long-foretold judgment. Excavations at Hazor (Yigael Yadin; later Amnon Ben-Tor) reveal a conflagration layer and toppled basalt statues matching the biblical description of Joshua’s fire-destruction (Joshua 11:10-13). This affirms the historicity of the campaign and the seriousness of the Canaanites’ obstinacy. Biblical Pattern Of Judicial Hardening • Pharaoh – Exodus 7–14 • Sihon king of Heshbon – Deuteronomy 2:30 • Israel’s unbelievers – John 12:39-40 (quoting Isaiah 6:9-10) • Those rejecting Christ – Romans 1:24, 26, 28; Romans 11:7-8 In every case, persistent resistance precedes God’s act, underscoring accountability (Proverbs 29:1). Sovereignty And Human Responsibility Scripture consistently affirms both divine sovereignty and authentic human volition: 1. God’s Sovereignty: Ephesians 1:11; Isaiah 46:10 2. Human Choice: Deuteronomy 30:19; Joshua 24:15 The Bible never treats these as mutually exclusive but as concurrent truths (Acts 2:23 combines “God’s set purpose” with “you… put Him to death”). Compatibilist Model Of Freedom Compatibilism (reflected in Augustine, Calvin, and many modern analytic philosophers) defines free will as acting according to one’s own desires and reasons, even if those desires are within God’s providence. The Canaanite kings desired to fight Israel; God’s hardening ensured they carried out what they already wanted, fulfilling His redemptive plan without violating their agency. Alternative (Molinist) Model A Molinist could read Joshua 11:20 as God placing these kings in circumstances where He knew, via middle knowledge, they would freely choose war. Either framework maintains both divine foreordination and libertarianly significant choice. Philosophical Coherence Logical consistency arises when “freedom” is distinguished from “autonomy.” Scripture never presents humans as autonomous but as contingent creatures (Acts 17:28). True moral accountability requires only that actions flow from one’s character and intentions, not that they be outside God’s foreknowledge or decree. Moral And Ethical Concerns 1. Prolonged Patience: 400 years of warning (Genesis 15:16). 2. Warnings Given: Jericho heard (Joshua 2:9-11), Gibeon repented (Joshua 9). Repentance was possible and rewarded. 3. Salvific Openness: Rahab (Joshua 6) and later Ruth the Moabitess demonstrate that individuals who turned to Yahweh found mercy. Thus Joshua 11 is not genocide but capital judgment limited in scope and time, akin to a divine courtroom where the sentence fell only after due process. Free Will In Human Experience Behavioral science notes that repeated choices create neural pathways, making repentance harder (Hebrews 3:13, “hardened by sin’s deceitfulness”). God’s hardening often mirrors this natural psychological principle: a point of no return initiated by the sinner, ratified by God. The Function In Redemptive History 1. Securing Israel’s Land: Necessary for Messianic lineage (Micah 5:2). 2. Preserving Theological Purity: Preventing syncretism that later plagued Israel (Judges 2:10-13). 3. Typological Foreshadow: Previews final judgment when persistent rebels are “given over” (Revelation 16:9-11). Practical Implications For Today • Warning: Habitual sin can lead to irreversible hardness. • Hope: Even cultures under judgment still allow individual escape via faith (Rahab). • Evangelism: Proposes urgency—“Today, if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts” (Hebrews 3:15). Conclusion Joshua 11:20 harmonizes with free will by depicting God’s sovereign, judicial hardening of those already set in rebellion. Their freedom to will evil remains intact; God’s sovereignty ensures their choices serve His redemptive purposes. The verse exemplifies the consistent biblical principle that divine judgment is never arbitrary, always just, and ultimately aimed at the greater good of salvation history culminating in Christ. |
    |