That is possible, but the reference is to vague and that does not explain the Exodus or Joshua's army.
Maybe it is vague but is the first mention of YHWH and not too long after YHWH is supposed to have revealed His name to Moses.
It is pointing to a people in the right place and time for Israel. Nobody should be expecting to find mention of Israel at this time, since they were not referred to as Israel afaik.
It is not meant to explain the Exodus, it is just part of the evidence that the story is correct. The Exodus is explained in that book, Exodus.
Most of the battles Joshua fought are with just one two or maybe 3 nation states at a time. Israel does not need hundreds of thousands in their army if they have good strategy and especially if YHWH is on their side and fighting for them. But of course that part about YHWH is not allowed for in academia.
Yes, you have not provided any evidence except for dating the destruction of Jericho and the Bible told me so, which id not evidence. You provided nothing else and you have not responded to the references and evidence I provided.
The Bible is ancient documents which is evidence. If you want to say that Exodus and Joshua etc were made up as origin myths for Israel and the story is not real then that needs evidence and not guesswork based on suppositions. The evidence I provide is confirmation of the Bible documents and shows that the suppositions of deniars are not needed and are wrong,,,,,,,,,,,,,, that would include your references.
It is actually not easy to plough through all the archaeology and theories about this topic and most people who have good ideas also have wrong ideas imo. But I go in with the view that the Biblical dating and story are correct and that makes it easier to sort out truth from error. Faith is good in that way even if academia needs more than faith, they say. But interestingly they use their faith that YHWH is not real and did not do miracles in the stories but don't like to call it that.
Only that Jericho was destroyed, No Joshua army is known by any evidence. The evidence indicates the Egyptians destroyed Jericho. Yes. Joshua tells a story, but no evidence to back up the existence of any such army or the Conquest of Canaan which never happened.
As cited it is Egypt that destroyed Jericho and conquered Canaan,
When did Egypt do that? Which year are you taking for destruction of Jericho? Do you think they could have done it in the way the story says or did they need a huge army? Walking around the city and blowing trumpets is not about a huge army, it is about God.
The Bible cannot justify itself in history without independent evidence. Yes, academic archaeology and history stand on actual objective verifiable evidence. You go to great lengths to cite evidence to justify the date of the destruction of Jericho but play Duck, Bob, and Weave when it comes to back up the important claims when there is no evidence.
I can only give evidence for what there is evidence for.
Is there actual objective verifiable evidence for the fanciful stories, hypotheses that academics come us with? It seems to be based on the idea that there is no evidence for the Exodus and that academia wants any evidence to be in the 12th century. But the evidence I give is for a 14th century conquest, as does the Biblical evidence,,,,,,,,,,,,, and the story is not a fiction based on errors of interpretation, it is the Biblical story which every find of evidence supports.
Interestingly I see evidence which supports the Bible and then check out the interpretation of that evidence by Biblical minimalists and see how they come up with other hypotheses about it instead of relating to the actual stories in the Bible.
How do you ignore the intellectual 'volcano' of Mount Ebal?
Again and again, the Bible like all ancient texts cannot justify itself without independent evidence. Whether this or that town is destroyed is not the real issue. The real issue is there is no evidence for Joshua or his army that claimed to destroy Jericho and conquer all of Canaan. Actually, it is well documented that Egypt conquered Canaan and what was a small Hebrew tribe.
Being justified by academia is not important really, but when academia through what it says is lack of evidence then goes on to hypothesise other scenarios about the origins of Israel, that is sad, especially when a lot of it is just ignoring the evidence that does exist in the Bible and in archaeology and wanting something easily explained without having to bring in miracles from God.
No, It is claimed that Joshua conquered almost all of the Canaanite Kingodom and divided it among the 12 tribes, refernces to follow.
Yes it is claimed that God fulfilled His promises and conquered Canaan and gave Israel a place to reside and grow etc. and that seems to be emphasised whilst ignoring the parts that tell of the areas not conquered and that still needed to be conquered.
The land was divided up and God said that He would drive out the people,,,,,,,,,,,, which over time did happen (see Josh 13:6,7)
See Josh 15:63, 16:10, 17:12-18, 18:1-4, etc
The story is ambiguous but can be read to be a consistent story of a conquest that gave Israel the land but which was ongoing.