Christian Apologist Responds to Atheist Richard Dawkins Old Testament 'Genocide' Claim

Christian Post ^ | 10/31/2019 | By Justin L. Ayoub

[SeekAndFind]

Christian apologist William Craig has offered a response to atheist intellectual Richard Dawkins who called him "a deplorable apologist for genocide" in his column last week.

In a speech at the Sheldonian Theater at Oxford University on Tuesday, Craig responded to Dawkins' allegations during the question and answer session.

“There was no racial war here, no command to kill them all,” he said, alluding to extermination of the Canaanites in the Old Testament, “the command was to drive them out.”

He then said: “I would say that God has the right to give and take life as He sees fit. Children die all the time! If you believe in the salvation, as I do, of children, who die, what that meant is that the death of these children meant their salvation. People look at this [genocide] and think life ends at the grave but in fact this was the salvation of these children, who were far better dead … than being raised in this Canaanite culture."

Organizers of the event left an empty chair on stage for Dawkins who has continuously refused to debate Craig, saying Craig does not have the worthy credentials.

“I always said when invited to do debates that I would be happy to debate a bishop, a cardinal, a pope, an archbishop, indeed I have done those, but I don’t take on creationists and I don’t take on people whose only claim to fame is that they are professional debaters; they’ve got to have something more than that. I’m busy," said Dawkins.

Dawkins was replaced by a panel of three Oxford Academics. Among them were Dr. Daniel Came and Philosophy Senior Research Fellow Stephen Priest.

Oxford Inter-collegiate Christian Union President Robbie Strachan praised Craig's speech, saying it contained convincing philosophical arguments.

“The next step after establishing that the existence of God is a possibility is obviously to find out what that God might be like. Christians believe in a good and loving God, which is why the ‘problem of evil’ question came up last night," he said.

[kosciusko51]

"If you believe in the salvation, as I do, of children, who die, what that meant is that the death of these children meant their salvation. People look at this [genocide] and think life ends at the grave but in fact this was the salvation of these children, who were far better dead … than being raised in this Canaanite culture."

I think this line of thought is dangerous, as it could easily be used to justify abortion. Better to die in the womb than be raised in an unbelieving household.

[G Larry]

It doesn’t help to make the wrong argument in response to the atheist.

[Karliner]

It would probably be more rational to show just who the Canaanites were and what they were doing. They were way worse than Sodom and Gomorrah

[A_perfect_lady]

Deuteronomy 7:2 And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:

Deuteronomy 20: 16-17 16 But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: 17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee:

[Zionist Conspirator]

There are three things I am sick of:

1)Non-theists having moral standards,
2)"Theists" who feel they have to "justify" the commandments of A-mighty G-d,
3)Chrstians (or "anti-chrstians") acting as if the "old testament" were their book to defend. Oh, and one more:
4)Jews who never defend the TaNa"KH because it's a "chrstian" book.

[SeekAndFind]

I think what troubles a lot of People is God using His people — THE ISRAELITES to do the dirty job of killing men, women and children.

If you were to ask me to do it, I wouldn’t have the heart to actually act ( of course, this will get me into trouble with the Almighty).

Not sure if it would have been more acceptable to men like Dawkins had God simply destroyed the Canaanites the same way He did with Sodom and Gomorah instead of commanding His people to do the killing.

[Manly Warrior]

Arguing with unbeleivers about anything other than the condition of THEIR soul and the Way, the Truth and the Life ( Jesus) is a waste of time.

They thrive on contention, explaining to them the mind of God ( as if we can) is a fools errand. Tell them the Gospel of Grace ( the only one) and them tell them that now they have had fair warning, their blood is on them and them alone; they are one breathe or heart beat from meeting the Creator and that there is no redo or mulligans once before the throne...

Hand them a business card with your contact info for possible future reference, “Drop the mike” and leave them to their reveling.

[bk1000]

I believe He had a good reason for destroying these peoples. They had been compromised by the blood of the fallen. Their descendants were half Nephalem. They had to go.

[kosciusko51]

Deuteronomy 7:2-11 (NASB)

2 and when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them. 3 “Furthermore, you shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor shall you take their daughters for your sons. 4 “For they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods; then the anger of the LORD will be kindled against you and He will quickly destroy you. 5 “But thus you shall do to them: you shall tear down their altars, and smash their [sacred] pillars, and hew down their Asherim, and burn their graven images with fire.

6 “For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. 7 “The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, 8 but because the LORD loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the LORD brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. 9 “Know therefore that the LORD your God, He is God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant and His lovingkindness to a thousandth generation with those who love Him and keep His commandments; 10 but repays those who hate Him to their faces, to destroy them; He will not delay with him who hates Him, He will repay him to his face. 11 “Therefore, you shall keep the commandment and the statutes and the judgments which I am commanding you today, to do them.

Deuteronomy 20:16-18 (NASB)

16 “Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 “But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the LORD your God has commanded you, 18 so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the LORD your God.

[super7man]

That’s a good list.

[odawg]

The error in Dawkins’ thinking, and people like him, stems from the fact that he was raised in a culture that had its basis in Christianity, that promotes a more humane society. That does not mean a perfect society.

He does not understand or know the Old Testament historical context, and is not interested in finding out; he just wants to sit in judgment. I am sure Satan took the moral high ground against God.

I wonder if Dawkins considers abortion genocide. I bet he does not.

[super7man]

Or the flood....

[WKUHilltopper]

Dawkins is an arrogant, pompous fool.

[miss marmelstein]

What a puffed-up jackanapes. Typical of almost every atheist I’ve ever met. They make vegans look humble.

[wbarmy]

Also remember, the Lord said he would use the lion and bee and wasp and other means to drive out the people in the land before the Israelites would arrive. Which is why it says in the Bible;

Deut 18:12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.

There weren’t as many of them left to actually fight or kill. Many had already left for other places.

[Notthereyet]

Thank you, A_perfect_lady-!

Whatever that gentleman thinks he is reading it is NOT the same Bible that instructs the destruction of the Lord God’s enemies.

Peoples were, in some cases offered the opportunity to leave and if they chose to, it would be to their life’s advantage.

That said, it was not always the case.

War is war.

For the gentleman in question to contend otherwise is to attempt to avoid looking harsh.

[Sans-Culotte]

If you were to ask me to do it, I wouldn’t have the heart to actually act ( of course, this will get me into trouble with the Almighty).

You and I probably would not today, but back in "the Bible Days" life was a lot tougher and so were the people. Think of the order Saul gave to David to kill 200 Philistines and bring back their foreskins. Yikes! That was a pretty bloody time.

[LeonardFMason]

AMEN!
AMEN!
AMEN!

Mark 16:15 King James Version (KJV)

15 And He(The Lord Jesus) said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.

I have never seen one of these debates accomplish a thing in the furtherance of the Gospel.

Psalm 53 King James Version (KJV)

53 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

2 God looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that did seek God.

3 Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

4 Have the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread: they have not called upon God.

[Heartlander]

wank•er noun \waŋ-kər\
1.chiefly British usually vulgar: See Richard Dawkins