Paul R. Hinlicky - Joshua

This book has been more than five years in the making. I was excited when I received the assignment because I had long wanted to test my lifes work in systematic theology (which I prefer to call critical dogmatics) with a sustained exercise in biblical exegesis and theological commentary. Moreover, I have had an abiding theological interest in reaping a harvest from the postwar Jewish-Christian dialogue and the reassessment in Christian theology of traditional anti-Judaism. This interest began under the sponsorship of the late Richard John Neuhaus, who invited me to consultations he organized with Jewish theologians including David Novak, Peter Ochs, Leon Klenicki, and, on one memorable occasion, Michael Wyschogrod. Thus, I undertook the book of Joshua as a fitting challengethis particularly problematic book of the Bible. In historical fact, the problem of Joshua was already felt in the Greek translation of the Hebrew known as the Septuagint, and the problem became acute in face of the objections to its violence in gnostic circles, both Jewish and Christian. But the problem of the book of Joshua has become inescapable for us today after the twentieth centurys barbaric descent into total wara paradigm of utter destruction, divinely sanctioned no less, on display in the book of Joshua.

Full of enthusiasm, I plunged in. After a year or more of intensive research in the literature on Joshua, however, I was unexpectedly felled by a stroke. A steady but slow recovery further delayed the work until this past year when I was finally able to concentrate fully on the composition of the commentary. In hindsight, I am glad about the delay because the long simmering of the multiple ingredients composing Joshua has made for a more savory stewat least to the taste of the chef. Taste for yourselves and see!

I am grateful to Ellen, my wife of forty-six years, who has cheerfully and faithfully supported me in this challenging time, and also to our son, Will, who has likewise taken up many tasks on our St. Gall Farm in the mountains of Virginiafarmer tasks, which my stroke-injured left hand can no longer perform. To any others suffering with such a disability, I would like to mention here that this entire book has been composed through voice recognition technology. When I lost the ability to type, I feared for the future of my work as an author. But this technology has wonderfully provided the means to continue, and I heartily recommend it to others who need this kind of help.

I am also indebted to a number of theological friends and colleagues who have read all or part of this work in its various stages and provided feedback. Initially, biblical scholars Dr. Wesley Hill and Dr. Kathryn Schifferdecker commented on the chapter below called Preliminary Considerations, which works out the interpretive framework for the commentary that follows. When the full commentary was drafted, I greatly benefited from the scholarly feedback provided by literary critic Dr. Fritz Oehlschlaeger and from the Rev. Dr. Dave Delaney, Hebraist, colleague, pastor, and adjunct faculty at Roanoke College. For this project I also sought out readers who are working pastors. I am thus most happily indebted for reactions and reflections to the Rev. Gregory Fryer, who scrupulously proofread; the Rev. David C. Drebes, my pastor, who read the text as a journalist demanding clarity; and the Rev. Canon Natalie L. G. Hall, who deeply engaged the draft. Hall brought to bear her own multiple identities as child of a Jewish mother and a Lutheran father, and an ordained Lutheran serving an Episcopal diocese, offering numerous comments and suggestions and in the process saving the author from many a cultural faux pas. Both Drebes and Hall are Roanoke College alums, thus former students who have matured to become contemporary colleagues in ordained ministry. Finally, thanks are owed to my partner in podcast adventures (see our tongue-in-cheek-titled Queen of the Sciences ), the Rev. Dr. Sarah Hinlicky Wilson. Sarah, who is a pastor of Tokyo Lutheran Church in Japan (and this authors daughter), also provided rich reflection on the draft of the commentary, for which among many other things I am deeply grateful. The book everywhere reflects the criticism and appreciation provided by these readers, and the faults that remain are solely the authors. Soli Deo gloria!