Replies

Ahhhh, the old "If you point out how my suggestion is similar to what the nazis did, then God must be a nazi" ploy.

Of course, the problem with that little gem is that it requires you to say that the nazis were in the right, lest you be caught opposing God. Too bad for you....

The fact that you don't recognize the differences, as well as the similarities, between situations is rather telling.

In the Biblical accounts, the basic story line is that there is no way for the Israelites to co-exist with the people who already lived in the Promised Land. For Israel to take ownership required them to fully displace the previous inhabitants. You might have noticed that we are not proposing to stay in Iraq -- we're not looking for a new spot to live -- so that parallel goes away.

You might also note that Christian theology has a very difficult time explaining these passages in any satisfactory way.

The herem of Joshua (Josh. 6.24ff)was a call for the complete destruction of the people groups who stood in the way of the conquest of the promised land.

It is true, that Christians believe that the same God called Father and love in the New Testament issued this command to Moses, et. al. (Josh. 10.40; 11.12; cf. Deut. 7:24).

One answer is that God took the people where they were --- in their cultural context --- and would move them progressively along toward Christ. The full revelation of God's love and ethical imperatives such as the Sermon on the Mount would wait until the coming of the New or Greater than Joshua.

Beyond that, the call for herem was not simply for the sake of exterminating or killing people. The Canaanites were devoted to religious practices that would threaten the worship of Yahweh (and the redemption of humanity) with corruption and error. Brutal child sacrifice, religious prostitution and so on were essential features of Canaanite religion.

Yahweh did not order Joshua or the Hebrews on a never ending quest to kill all Gentiles. 'Holy war' was not a part of Israelitish religion. It was limited to a particular time and place and for a very specific end - the taking and holding of the land in order to create a foothold in this world for the message of salvation through Yahweh.

Defensive war is not ever necessarily condemned in the New Testament and even preemption may be seen as sometimes morally acceptable (such preemptive action as has been undertaken by President Bush). The conquest of the land was an attempt to stave off the corrupting influence that would later so mar and hinder the life of Israel (Num. 25:1 for example). The conquest and call for 'herem' was in that sense a sad but necessary preemptive defense.

I don't see a comparison between the call for violent jihad as a radical and basic part of Islam - a call and imperative that is to be seen as legitimate and practiced until all non-Muslims are converted or submitted to the rule of Islam & the record of the Land's conquest by Joshua.

Of course, the problem with that little gem is that it requires you to say that the nazis were in the right, lest you be caught opposing God. Too bad for you....

No you forget to notice Nazi's were not Gods people. Whom would you say are the more God believing nations...USA..Israel or Nazi Germany? No Christian in their right minds would HATE a Jew. AND they (muslims) are proposing to take our country and very much intent to, and kill everyone of us if they can. Given the popularity of removing God from everything we believe in....they may just succeed. Maybe you should get your nose out of theology and have a more personal relationship with Him, maybe you would get it. Your definition of Christianity and mine are going to differ quite a bit I'm sure. My bet is you'll turn Muslim in a heart beat to save your head.