11. THE BAFFLING HISTORY OF HEBRON

Let’s apply the notion of warrant to a common religious doubt, the inspiration of Scripture.

We read in Genesis that Hebron and Kiriath Arba are two names for the same place (35.27).  Kiriath Arba was named after Arba “the greatest man of the Anakim” (Jo 14:15).  Arba was “the father of Anak” (Jo 15:13, 21:11).  Anak’s three sons—Ahiman, Sheshai and Talmai—feature prominently in the intelligence briefing which the spies gave Moses and the Israelites (Jo 13:22); the spies identified them as “the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim)” (Nu 13:23). 

However, when the narrator recounts the attempt of the five Amorite kings to attack the Gibeonites, who were allies of the invading Israelites, Hoham is identified as the king of Hebron (Jo 10:3).  Hoham is not said to be a descendant of Arba, nor are any of the Nephilim said to have been in the ranks of his army. 

After the execution of Hoham, we are told that Joshua sacked Hebron and “left none remaining” (Jo 10:37); then he wiped out all the Anakim, except in Gaza, Gath and Ashdod (11:20-21).

Nevertheless, after Joshua allotted Hebron to Caleb (14:13), Caleb still had to drive out the “three sons of Anak” (Jo 15:14). 

Later on we learn that Hebron is made a city of refuge and given to the Levites (Jo 21:13). 

To sum it up, Hebron, a city of the Anakim, ruled by the three sons of Arba, is paradoxically said to have an Amorite king named Hoham; it was sacked utterly.  When, however, Caleb selected Hebron as his portion, he had to drive out the Anakim violently, even though we had just been told that it had been sacked by Joshua.  Then Hebron was given to the Levites, even though we had been told that Hebron was Caleb’s.

On the face of it, not all the details in this summary can be true according to the Law of Contradiction (a statement and its contradiction cannot both be true).  For example, either Hebron was ruled by the three sons of Anak or by Hoham; either Hebron was a city of the Nephilim or of the Amorites; either Joshua utterly sacked Hebron or Caleb did; either Joshua wiped out all the Anakim except in Gaza, Gath and Ashdod or not; either Hebron was Caleb’s city or it was a Levite city. 

Here is what people normally often say when they are confronted with Scriptural inconsistencies:  “How can the Bible be true, if it is inconsistent with itself?  If it is not true, how can it be inspired?”  Here the implicit warrant may be supplied as, If the Bible is inspired, then it must be free from error.  Let’s call this the Inerrancy Warrant.  The exact wording of this warrant will vary with the exact shade of opinion different believers have, but you will see why the exact wording does not matter.  Naturally, once human errors are found in the Bible—whether they are disagreements as noted above or manuscript variants—either the errors have to be explained away by some incredible arguments or the deal is off.   

Next time we will provide an alternative to the Inspiration Warrant which will free us from these difficulties.