Peace At Any Price?
that they met together with one purpose, to fight with Joshua and with Israel. Joshua 9:2 NASB
Together/ One – I have often been perplexed at modern Israel’s behavior toward terrorism. As you undoubtedly know, today’s nation of Israel is confronted by the daily threat, if not the action, of terrorist attacks, yet when these terrorists are apprehended, modern Israel does not execute them, even if they have been responsible for multiple deaths of Israeli citizens. In fact, Israel boasts that it has not executed a human being since Eichman. While this may sound remarkably moral, it has dire consequences. Terrorists who are imprisoned know that they will simply have to wait until some Israeli is abducted. Then they will most likely be traded for the release of the Jew. There are no capital consequences for murdering Jews. In recent times, this moral commitment resulted in trading thousands of terrorist prisoners for a handful of abducted Jews. And antisemitic atrocities continue. You have to wonder how modern Judaism became so far removed from the divine commands concerning pagan populations when God brought Israel to the land in the time of Joshua. Jericho, for example, was not spared at all despite the fact that no Israelite was killed by anyone in that city. Ai suffered the same fate. How is it that these lessons from the past seem to have been abandoned by modern Israel? The answer may be connected to a commentary by Maimonides in the twelfth century.
Maimonides has great influence in interpreting the Tanakh. Concerning the treaty with the Gibeonites, he argued on the basis of Deuteronomy 20:10-11 that the Jews were instructed to make peace with the occupants of the Land under three conditions: 1) they pay taxes, 2) they agree to servitude, and 3) they obey the Noahide laws. He suggests that this was the primary instruction about occupants in the Land, and only when those indigenous people refused was Israel commanded to exterminate them.
Maimonides interpretation amounts to economic, legal, and social domination, but it doesn’t seem to align with God’s direct commands about Jericho and Ai. Under Maimonides, Israel allows cultural diversity. It does not require assimilation even if it requires religious subservience. In other words, while it requires the conquered party to alter its economic, political, and social behavior, it does not require the indigenous population to convert. They remain resident aliens, not naturalized citizens. It appears to me that Maimonides was influenced by Roman policies rather than biblical ones, for this is more or less what Rome required of its vassal states. The contemporary consequences are devastating—for modern Israel, and frankly, for any country willing to allow an alternative culture to exist within its borders.
One other grammatical note before we move on. You’ll notice that the word yāḥad is used twice in this verse, once translated “together” and once as “one.” yāḥad means to become one, to make into one, to make yourself alone, that is, one. It is not the same word used of Jacob “alone” at the brook. Here it is used in two forms to emphasize the singular purpose of the gathering of opposing forces. This is the same root word used to emphasize the singularity of the One True God in Exodus 20. Its derivatives also include the description of the “assembly” of Israel at Sinai and in the synagogue. The NASB translation “one” obscures the idiom involved. Literally, the verse reads “one mouth,” an expression of verbal and behavioral agreement. These opposing kings spoke the same words. They essentially entered into a treaty of aggression. It seems that allowing these tribes to comingle, to continue even as “servants” of Israel, leads to a situation much like the modern Middle East. The rulers agree to exterminate the Jews. Israel’s response is defensive, but this does not eliminate the problem. God had a different solution in the days of Joshua.
Topical Index: Maimonides, assimilation, yāḥad, Joshua 9:2
