BEMA Episode Link: 240: Sin and the Archaeology of Joshua w/ Elle Grover Fricks
Episode Length: 34:38
Published Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2021 01:00:00 -0700
Session 6
About this episode:

Brent Billings and Elle Grover Fricks discuss sin and the archaeology of Joshua.

Learning Hebrew with Elle — Sin (PDF)

Discussion Video for BEMA 240

List of Archaeological Periods (Levant) — Wikipedia

History of the Ancient Levant — Wikipedia

Doron Ben-Ami — Wikipedia

Elle’s Website

Transcript for BEMA 240

Notes

*Note: The following notes are handwritten by me, Adam, and I reserve the right to be wrong.

BEMA Episode 240: Sin and the Archaeology of Joshua w/ Elle Grover Fricks - Study Notes

Title & Source Summary

Episode: 240 - Sin and the Archaeology of Joshua w/ Elle Grover Fricks Hosts: Brent Billings and Elle Grover Fricks (Marty Solomon absent) Focus: Hebrew terminology for sin and archaeological evidence for the Conquest of Joshua

This episode explores two major topics: an etymological breakdown of six Hebrew words related to sin and wrongdoing, and archaeological evidence supporting the historical context of Joshua’s conquest. Elle provides linguistic clarity on how different Hebrew words for sin convey distinct meanings and paths of deviation, then transitions to examining how archaeological findings from the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age illuminate the historical setting of Israel’s entry into the Promised Land.

Key Takeaways

  • Six primary Hebrew words describe different aspects of sin, each with distinct meanings that are often flattened in English translation
  • The concept of “the path” (derech) serves as an organizing metaphor for understanding different types of sin
  • Khata (sin) means “missing the mark” - stepping off the path unintentionally
  • Avah (iniquity) means “twisted” or “crooked” - deliberately distorting the path
  • Pesha (transgression) means breaking away from a covenant agreement - abandoning the path entirely
  • Asham (guilt) depicts a weary camel - neglecting the path through exhaustion or stubbornness
  • Ra’a (evil) represents noisy shattering violence - destroying wholeness and shalom
  • Resha (wickedness) means being a noisy agitating person - causing disruption
  • Archaeological evidence from the Late Bronze Age shows Egypt abandoned their military occupation of Canaan around 1207 BCE, destroying fortifications as they left
  • The Sea Peoples (refugees from Mycenae, Greece) invaded Egypt, Turkey, and Canaan simultaneously, forcing Egypt to withdraw
  • These Sea Peoples became the Philistines, whose name (palash) means “to roll in like a rock”
  • Distinctive elliptical settlements appearing in the Shephelah around 1207 BCE mark the arrival of Israelite settlers
  • The conquest narrative is supported by archaeology showing a land recently vacated by military forces with weakened city-state defenses

Main Concepts & Theories

Hebrew Words for Sin: The Path Metaphor

The organizing principle for understanding sin terminology is the concept of “the path” (derech), fundamental to Hebrew thought about righteous living. Each word describes a different way of deviating from or failing to walk this path:

1. Khata (Sin - “Missing the Mark”) The most common word for sin in Hebrew, khata perfectly corresponds to the Greek word for sin. The image comes from archery - missing the target. In the path metaphor, this represents an unintentional step off the path, a mistake or error in navigation. This is the least intentional form of deviation.

2. Avah (Iniquity - “Twisted/Crooked”) The technical image is twisted, crooked, or distorted. This word carries significant theological weight because God constantly calls His people to be “upright” (yashar), which is embedded in the name Israel (Yashar’el - “the upright ones”). Avah represents walking the path in a crooked or distorted manner - taking what God has asked and twisting it for one’s own purposes. This resonates with Romans 1 themes of distortion. Unlike khata, this involves deliberate manipulation.

3. Pesha (Transgression - “Breaking Away”) Still used in modern Hebrew where it means “crime,” pesha originally meant breaking away from a covenant or agreement. In modern usage, it implies breaking the covenant of being a good citizen. In the path analogy, this is explicitly rejecting the commitment to walk the path and heading off independently. This represents a conscious choice to violate an agreement.

4. Asham (Guilt - “Weary Camel”) The vivid imagery of a slow or weary camel provides the picture for asham. This represents being neglectful of the path - not stepping off, not twisting it, not abandoning it, but simply sitting down and stopping. The image is of exhaustion, stubbornness, or lacking necessary resources. In Leviticus 4 (Vayikrah), the guilt offering provided a ritual mechanism for leaders and communities who had “gotten tired on the path” to restart their journey. This demonstrates God’s provision for those who become weary in their walk.

5. Ra’a (Evil - “Noisy Shattering Violence”) The first mention appears in Genesis 2. The onomatopoeia of “ra’a” evokes the sound of violent shattering. While tov (good), shalom (peace), and tamim (complete/whole) relate to wholeness and well-being, ra’a represents the opposite - someone coming through and shattering things. This doesn’t fit the path metaphor but describes the nature of evil as destructive violence against wholeness.

6. Resha (Wickedness - “Noisy Agitating Person”) Related to ra’a, resha describes being a noisy person who agitates others. Like a plate shattering, a wicked person enters a room seeking to get people agitated and disturbed. This stands in contrast to the righteous person (tsadik). Wickedness is characterized by creating disruption and unrest rather than peace.

Archaeological Context of Joshua’s Conquest

The Late Bronze Age Setting (circa 1400-1200 BCE)

The Late Bronze Age in Canaan was characterized by a system of city-states similar to ancient Greece (Athens, Sparta, etc.), with separate chieftains ruling different cities. However, these city-states existed under Egyptian military occupation and control.

Evidence of Egyptian Occupation:

  • The Amarna Letters: A cache of tablets found in southern Egypt containing correspondence from Canaanite city-state kings complaining to Pharaoh about trade disputes and requesting intervention
  • Archaeological finds in the tel layers (strata): Egyptian cartouches (insignias) on perfume vessels, bronze statue bases of Rameses IV, swords with pharaonic portraits
  • These artifacts allow archaeologists to date the period of Egyptian occupation

The Sea Peoples Invasion (circa 1200 BCE)

A drought and famine in Greece (specifically Mycenae) drove Greek refugees to become marauding invaders, attacking Egypt, Turkey (Hittite territory), and Canaan simultaneously. They were so formidable that Egypt and the Hittites - previously at war - formed an alliance to defend against them. These invaders became known in the archaeological record as “the Sea Peoples.”

Egyptian Withdrawal: As Egypt pulled out of Canaan to defend their homeland, they systematically destroyed the massive fortifications they had maintained throughout the land. This scorched-earth policy prevented the Sea Peoples from using Egyptian military infrastructure. The archaeological record shows a consistent ash layer across multiple sites dated to the same period, confirming this widespread destruction.

Israelite Settlement (circa 1207 BCE)

Following the Egyptian withdrawal, distinctive archaeological evidence appears:

  • Semi-mysterious nomadic settlers arrive “over the Jordan River” as described in the biblical text
  • Extremely distinctive elliptical settlement sites appear
  • Cultural markers distinguishing these settlers from indigenous Canaanites:
    • Storage of goods in holes in the ground
    • Large pottery vessels (human-sized) unlike typical pottery
    • Multifamily dwellings similar to insulae
  • These settlements “explode” across the Shephelah (the region between the coastline and the mountains of Judah)
  • The sites gradually transition from nomadic setups to permanent settlements

Historical Significance: Rather than invading a land of heavily fortified cities with standing armies, the Israelites entered a recently vacated territory where city-states had only residual militias after generations of Egyptian military regulation. Within 15 years of Egyptian withdrawal, these settlers established themselves throughout the region. The archaeological evidence suggests divine timing in preparing the land for Israel’s entry.

The Philistines

The Sea Peoples who invaded Canaan became the Philistines. The Hebrew word palash means “to roll in like a rock,” describing travelers who rolled in. This etymology may serve as a constant reminder in the Torah that these are outsiders (gerim) whom Israel is commanded to care for and love, rather than make war against - a pointed irony given Israel’s frequent conflicts with the Philistines.

Examples & Applications

Translation Challenges

The ESV translation philosophy attempts consistency in rendering Hebrew words with the same English equivalents. However, this breaks down with words like joy (eight different Hebrew words but only “rejoice” and “be glad” in English) and potentially with sin terminology. This highlights why studying Hebrew provides depth that English translations cannot capture.

The Guilt Offering

Leviticus 4 prescribes a guilt offering (asham) specifically for leaders and communities. Understanding asham as the image of a weary camel sitting down on the path transforms this offering from merely addressing wrongdoing to providing a ritual mechanism for renewal. The guilt offering says: “We’ve been tired, we’ve stopped running the race, but here’s how we start again.” This reflects God’s understanding of human limitation and His provision for re-engagement with the path.

The Lord of the Rings Connection

Boromir’s attempt to take the Ring from Frodo exemplifies pesha - breaking away from his covenant commitment to protect Frodo and the Ring. He didn’t accidentally fail (khata), didn’t twist his mission for personal gain while maintaining the appearance of faithfulness (avah), and didn’t simply grow weary (asham). Instead, he broke his covenant agreement and pursued his own path.

Archaeological Process and Discovery

The discovery of a single olive pit beneath fortifications in Jerusalem revolutionized understanding of 2 Samuel 5’s account of David capturing the city through waterways. For years, the archaeological consensus held this was impossible because the waterways weren’t built during David’s time. One olive pit allowed proper dating of the fortification, revealing it was later than previously thought, thus validating the biblical account. This illustrates how archaeology continually unfolds new understanding.

Modern Relevance: Care for Outsiders

The reminder that “Philistines” literally means “those who rolled in” carries contemporary significance. If the Torah constantly commands care for the outsider, stranger, and sojourner, then every mention of the Philistines may function as a reminder that these enemies are precisely the people Israel should be loving and providing for. The irony of constant warfare with a people whose name reminds Israel of their duty to love outsiders resonates with modern conflicts in the same geographic region.

Potential Areas for Further Exploration

Theological Topics
  • Detailed study of the various offerings in Leviticus and their specific purposes
  • The concept of righteousness (tsadik) as the opposite of wickedness (resha)
  • The relationship between shalom, tov, and tamim as concepts of wholeness
  • The “upright ones” (Yashar’el) as a defining characteristic of Israel’s identity
  • How the path metaphor (derech) functions throughout Hebrew scripture
Hebrew Language Studies
  • The eight different Hebrew words for joy and their distinct meanings
  • The translation philosophy differences between ESV, NIV, NASB, and other English versions
  • Onomatopoeia in Hebrew and how sound conveys meaning
  • The significance of the “hineni” (here I am) response in Hebrew culture
Archaeological Topics
  • The Bronze Age periods (Early, Middle, Late) and their characteristics
  • Tel excavation methodology and dating techniques
  • The Chalcolithic era (Elle’s favorite period)
  • The Amarna Letters and ancient Near Eastern diplomacy
  • Dr. Doron Ben-Ami’s excavations of the City of David and Tel Hazor
  • Red-banded pottery and how it identifies the Sea Peoples/Philistines
  • The methodology of pottery analysis and vessel reconstruction from fragments
  • The controversy and debate culture within academic archaeology
Historical Context
  • The Egyptian-Hittite conflicts and alliance against the Sea Peoples
  • The Mycenaean civilization and causes of their exodus
  • The transition from nomadic to settled life in ancient Israel
  • Egyptian military occupation strategies in Canaan
  • The city-state system in the Late Bronze Age Levant
Biblical Studies
  • Comprehensive study of the Psalms
  • Deep dive into the Book of Exodus
  • Analysis of the conquest narratives in Joshua in light of archaeological findings
  • The theme of covenant-breaking (pesha) throughout scripture
  • How understanding Hebrew etymology changes interpretation of familiar passages

Comprehension Questions

  1. Explain the “path” (derech) metaphor and how each of the four main sin words (khata, avah, pesha, asham) represents a different way of failing to walk the path properly. What are the key distinctions between these types of deviation?

  2. How does the archaeological evidence from the Late Bronze Age support the historical plausibility of the Joshua conquest narrative? Specifically address the role of Egyptian withdrawal and the Sea Peoples invasion.

  3. What is the significance of the etymology of “Philistines” (palash - “to roll in”) in relation to Torah’s commands about caring for outsiders? How might this linguistic detail have functioned as a reminder to ancient Israelites?

  4. Compare and contrast ra’a (evil) and resha (wickedness). How do these concepts differ from the four sin words that use the path metaphor, and why might this distinction be important?

  5. How does understanding asham as “weary camel” change the meaning and purpose of the guilt offering in Leviticus 4? What does this reveal about God’s understanding of human limitation?

Summary

Episode 240 provides crucial linguistic and historical foundation for understanding both sin and the conquest period. Elle’s etymological breakdown reveals that Hebrew possesses a sophisticated vocabulary for describing different types of moral failure, each with distinct characteristics and implications. The path metaphor unifies khata (unintentional deviation), avah (deliberate distortion), pesha (covenant-breaking), and asham (neglectful exhaustion), while ra’a and resha describe the destructive nature of evil and wickedness as forces that shatter wholeness.

The archaeological discussion demonstrates how scientific evidence supports rather than contradicts the biblical narrative when properly understood in historical context. The Late Bronze Age collapse, driven by Egyptian withdrawal in response to the Sea Peoples invasion, created precisely the conditions described in Joshua - a land of weakened city-states without standing armies, recently cleared of fortifications. The appearance of distinctive Israelite settlements across the Shephelah around 1207 BCE aligns with the biblical timeline. Rather than presenting an either-or choice between faith and history, archaeology reveals divine providence in timing and circumstance.

The episode also models how to approach potentially challenging topics like archaeology and textual criticism from a posture of confidence rather than fear. Elle emphasizes that archaeology is an unfolding science where new discoveries continually refine understanding, illustrated by how a single olive pit revolutionized interpretation of David’s conquest of Jerusalem. The reminder that academic archaeology involves vigorous debate and revision encourages humility about current consensus while maintaining confidence in the general reliability of both the biblical text and archaeological method.

Finally, the observation that “Philistines” etymologically means “those who rolled in” - marking them as outsiders whom Israel should love rather than wage war against - demonstrates how even enemy terminology can carry prophetic critique of Israel’s failures to embody Torah values. This linguistic detail may have functioned as a constant reminder of Israel’s covenant obligation to care for the stranger, an obligation they frequently violated. The contemporary relevance of this ancient tension between tribal conflict and covenant obligation to love outsiders remains evident in ongoing conflicts in the same geographic region.

Edit | Previous | Next