Posted on 11/25/2017 11:37:48 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Are the conquest narratives in the Old Testament any different from what we are currently viewing with ISIS throughout the Middle East and Europe? Questions like this often come up in discussing the existence of objective moral values and duties and their proper grounding. When God is posited as the grounding of morality, the objector usually brings up some obscure OT text that he or she thinks will demonstrate that God has a warped sense of morality and it is usually in this context that the conquest narratives are brought up.
False Distinction
One reason this problem has persisted is that many Christians aren’t comfortable with God judging people; they draw a distinction in their minds between the God of the OT and the non-violent, peaceful Jesus of the NT. However, this distinction is an artificial one, Jesus regularly denounced others and threatened judgment. He took a whip and drove moneychangers out of the temple (Jn 2:15). Never mind what he said in Matthew 18, “. . . whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.” So this distinction between God in the OT and Christ in the NT falls flat on death ears. Christ didn’t downplay the texts depicting judgment and for modern Christians doing so actually skews the image of Christ.
The Bible is Literally True
We’ve all hear this before, “Either the bible is literally true, or it’s literally false.” I remember agreeing with statements like this as a kid growing up in church; it sounded pious, but I didn’t know any better at the time. Many critics of Christianity as well as pastors have little to no understanding of biblical hermeneutics. Just because everything in Scripture is true, does not mean it is literally true. What am I saying? If we take everything in Scripture to be literally true, then tree’s sing,(1 Chr 16:33; Ps 96:12), Christ is a door (Jn 10:7), YahWeh flies in the sky on Cherubs (2 Sam 22:11), and Elihu’s heart jumped out of his chest (Job 37:1). Clearly everyone understands these texts to be figures of speech and aren’t to be taken literally; they were consciously exaggerated by the author for the sake of effect. Taken literally, these passages sound like a Harry Potter novel.
The statement “either the bible is literally all true, or it’s literally all false,” is also a logical fallacy. Just because some passages of Scripture are literally true, it doesn’t follow that all passages are literally true. So, not only is thinking in this manner hermeneutically flawed, it’s logically flawed as well. There we have it, two solid reasons to reject a rigid literal only interpretation.
Additionally, there are good textual reasons not to take the conquest accounts literal. K Lawson Younger Jr. notes that the accounts in Joshua 9-12 are figurative and utilize what he calls a “transmission code,” which is a commonly stylized and frequently hyperbolic method of recording history.[1]
It is clear that from within the book of Joshua itself, the text indicates that it isn’t to be taken literally. Consider the text of Joshua 10:20, ”It came about when Joshua and the sons of Israel had finished slaying them with a very great slaughter, until they weredestroyed, and the survivors who remained of them had entered the fortified cities.” If they were slaughtered and destroyed then there shouldn’t have been any survivors.
One of the best examples of why we should regard the text as hyperbolic occurs in Joshua 8.
v. 16, And all the people who were in the city were called together to pursue them, and they pursued Joshua and were drawn away from the city.
v. 17, So not a man was left in Ai or Bethel who had not gone out after Israel, and they left the city unguarded and pursued Israel.
v. 22, The others came out from the city to encounter them, so that they were trapped in the midst of Israel, some on this side and some on that side: and they slew them until no one was left of those who survived or escaped.
v. 24, Now when Israel had finished killing all the inhabitants of Ai in the field in the wilderness where they pursued them, and all of them were fallen by the edge of the sword until they were destroyed, then all Israel returned to Ai and struck it with the edge of the sword.
Taken literally, this block of scripture would be manifestly nonsensical. If there were no survivors or fugitives remaining in Ai, who did the Israelites pursue?
Joshua also exaggerates numbers:
v. 25, all who fell that day, both men and women, were 12,000—all the people of Ai.
Yet earlier the spies Joshua sent in prior to the battle for Ai make the remark:
Do not let all the people go up; only about two or three thousand men need to go up to Ai; do not make all the people toil up there, for they are few (Josh 7:3).
Clearly these texts aren’t meant to be literal, something else is going on and the hagiographic hyperbolic interpretation fits best and takes the passages that appear at face value to be nonsensical and interprets them within a flexible framework, just as other Near Eastern texts were understood at the time. A great deal of the narratives that contain troop numbers and or casualties mentioned are exaggerated for added effect. This was common during that period.
The Canaanites Were Innocent
Often times it’s assumed by many that the Canaanites were the victims of a terrible crime against humanity. “They were attacked and massacred for no reason at all,” I’ve heard some say—but is this true? Scripture presents a different story; the Canaanites were called wicked (Deut 9:5). What were they guilty of? Moses listed all the occultic practices of the Canaanites; they did “detestable things,” “practiced witchcraft,” and sacrificed their children to Baal via fire. Moreover, the Canaanites practiced bestiality—disgusting—this is why it is mentioned in Leviticus 18; God did not want the Israelites practicing this as the Gentile nations around them had done. “Not good enough evidence,” the skeptic might say, “the authors were biased and looking for a reason to fight the Canaanites.” To be sure, no one is without bias, but did the author accurately report what the Canaanites were doing? Extra-biblical evidence corroborates what the OT reports of them. In the Canaanite epic poem The Baal Cycle, we learn: “Mightiest Baal hears; He makes love with a heifer in the outback, A cow in the field of Death’s Realm . . . He lies with her seventy times seven, Mounts eighty times eight; [She conceives and bears a boy].” I think the evidence speaks for itself; Canaanite sexual practices are well documented.
“Utterly Destroy”
In Joshua 6-12, it is reported that Joshua “utterly destroyed” multiple cities and peoples. It is unlikely that whoever finalized the form of Joshua intended it to convey that the Canaanites were exterminated at God’s command. Joshua was intended as a literary component consisting of Deuteronomy, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings. It is best to interpret it as preceded by Deuteronomy and succeeded by Judges. Given Judges is literarily linked to Joshua, the book presents a different story; it starts with the presumption that the Canaanites are still present in the land. So, Joshua on the surface seems to show that the Canaanites had been “utterly destroyed” yet Judges assumes they are not. In Joshua specific locations are mentioned where Joshua exterminated everyone (Hebron 10:36; Debir 10:38; Hillcountry Negev and western foothills 10:40). Yet, in the first chapter of Judges, it’s affirmed they couldn’t drive the Canaanites out from these very cities (Debir v.11; Hebron v.10; western foothills v. 9). Moreover, Joshua reports that he took the “whole land,” (Josh 11:23) whereas God makes a statement in Judges that presupposes Joshua did not take the whole land (2:21-23).
This tension can even be seen within Joshua itself, “It came about when Joshua and the sons of Israel had finished slaying them with a very great slaughter, until they were destroyed, and the survivors who remained of them had entered the fortified cities,” So, Joshua destroyed them yet they had survivors? What is going on? It seems to me, Joshua occurs in a literary genre that allows for the language of “utterly destroy” to be immediately followed up by a narrative stating the Canaanites were not “utterly destroyed.” So, put simply, Joshua appears to be highly stylized hyperbole whereas Judges appears to be more like down to earth history. This means Joshua is used to teach theological points rather than give a detailed account of history as it happened. Additionally, this sort of hyperbole was very common in Near Eastern conquest accounts and wasn’t understood as literal.
Some Innocents Were Killed
Given that the interpretation of Joshua presented here, the critic might still argue that some Canaanites were still killed including innocent children. I fully admit that this is possible. Is this a defendable position? My view is if we can coherently defend that if human beings on exceptionally rare occasions can kill innocents for some greater purpose or some greater good, then we have an even better reason for God issuing such a command.
First, humans kill innocents all the time for the sake of a greater good. Consider this scenario: a plane headed for Washington D.C. is reportedly hijacked. A terrorist has control of the aircraft and is headed for the White House, where thousands are gathered. The Air Force intercepts the plane and the fighter pilot is faced with a choice; he can either let the plane hit its intended target, killing thousands and potentially the leaders of the executive branch of government to include the president, or he can shoot the aircraft down and kill everyone on board to include the terrorists, men, women, and children. Is it coherent for this pilot in this extremely rare circumstance to kill innocent human beings? Most would say yes, he would be rational in making such a decision.
This pilot is armed with counterfactual knowledge and knows that if he does not shoot the plane down, more lives will be lost. Like the pilot, God knows counterfactuals as well. He knows not only what will occur, but also what would occur given different circumstances, and he knows this infallibly, whereas humans do not. So, is it coherent that God could command the killing of innocent human beings? My answer is yes. God may know that permitting the killing of some innocent Canaanites might have prevented future and greater loss of life or even greater apostasy by Israel leading to more spiritual death. The point is, if we as humans can rationally justify killing innocents in rare circumstances, and do so with hypothetical knowledge, then we have no grounds to criticize God, who does so, and is omniscient.
* Please read this related article from my colleague, Tim Stratton, shining additional light on the subject of the Canaanite Objection.
And he committed genocide and mass destruction regularly. God of the Old Testament was an emotionally insecure tyrant demanding constant worship. What we have today is sort of a God 2.0.
Roe v. Wade
Maybe, maybe not. But if Israel had as one said YES! to Jesus Christ would we Gentiles have been given “the unsearchabke riches of Christ” or been “made one new man out of the two”?
God used Israel’s hardness of heart to accomplish His secret purpose in Christ. He is an amazing GOD!
Yes, The Book of Job is a real test for that. You have four real idiots talking, and Job says some dumb things at times, so one has to listen when YWHW straightens them all out.
Dyslexia strikes again.
The Aztecs had massive human sacrifice, they killed so many people a year they had to go take people from other tribes to get their quota for the year. It’s likely that the Canaanites would have turned to coexisting Israelites for fresh meat had they not taken a good number of them out first. Then they also threw babies into bonfires. Pretty sure God didn’t like that either.
I don’t think that’s the question, the disturbing question is why would
God, who gave the 10 commandments to His people, among them, THOU SHALT NOT KILL, tell them to commit genocide.
THAT is the disturbing question that needs to be answered.
> So, how long until California experiences “The Big One”TM up close and personal?
It’s more likely that California will be overrun and slaughtered by invaders who don’t murder their children or denigrate marriage.
>I don’t think that’s the question, the disturbing question is why would
God, who gave the 10 commandments to His people, among them, THOU SHALT NOT KILL, tell them to commit genocide.
The actual words in Hebrew are “You shall not murder.”
https://www.levitt.com/hebrew/commandments.html#c6
>THAT is the disturbing question that needs to be answered.
I just answered it. Going to war and slaughtering your foes isn’t murder.
I’m not sure what your point is... if the thoughts expressed are true, then what are the implications? Does God command people to commit genocide? Can we worship such a God?
I have no problems with God judging the Canaanites for their wickedness... What I have trouble with is why he uses His people, the very ones He commanded not to murder, to kill.
Why didn’t God just destroy them Himself?
>The Aztecs had massive human sacrifice, they killed so many people a year they had to go take people from other tribes to get their quota for the year.
The Aztec system was actually slow genocide on the people they conquered. Whenever they find human remains in an Aztec temple it consists mostly of the bones from women and children. The other tribes were literally having the ability to reproduce being snatched from them. I’m fine with what the Spanish did there, the Aztecs are among the evilest people to ever live.
> It’s likely that the Canaanites would have turned to coexisting Israelites for fresh meat had they not taken a good number of them out first. Then they also threw babies into bonfires. Pretty sure God didn’t like that either.
The main beef the Egyptians had with the Israelites was the fact that they had huge families while the Egyptians were not reproducing due to infanticide and child sacrifice. This was a problem in the entire bronze age world around this time period and the Canaanites were no different. The Israelites were the only group in the area that didn’t practice this behavior hence why the story of Arabrham and Isaac is so prominent.
Murdering or not murdering your children are diametrically opposed systems that we see as today (with pro-life vs pro-abortion). The tribe that doesn’t murder their children is naturally going to be more numerous and completely disgusted by the child murder tribes. Extinction of the child murders is likely to follow, as it should.
I often wondered about the origin of child sacrifice. It seems like a stupid thing to do if a society wants to thrive.
But the reasoning was that you were not killing off all of your own children, just a firstborn or some of them. Still, the trend ended up being too many people doing it because crowd intelligence isn’t that high. The more I see, the more it appears like the twisted mirror image of the sacrifice of Christ.
He also foretold the destruction of Jerusalem as a result of their rejection of Himself, an event that entailed a lot more human suffering.
God reserves the right to judge and destroy nations, even the human race. He has done it before and He has continued to do it throughout history.
Trump utterly destroyed Clinton. But Clinton is still around.
Understand?
Jeremiah 7
16 “As for you, do not pray for this people, and do not lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you. 17 Do you not see what they are doing in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? 18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the queen of heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me. 19 Do they spite Me?” declares the LORD. “Is it not themselves they spite, to their own shame?” 20 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, “Behold, My anger and My wrath will be poured out on this place, on man and on beast and on the trees of the field and on the fruit of the ground; and it will burn and not be quenched.”
God is most righteous and just. There are some tribes (nations) that were annihilated, but these same people knew of the power and works of the living God of Israel and rejected Him. They had heard of the exodus and the miraculous battles of Israel yet they would still sacrifice their own children to their false god.
God even waited patiently until they were totally lost. When Abraham was receiving his promise from God His last explanation was crucial to His giving the promised land to Abraham's children of faith.
Gen 15:12-16
12 Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, terror and great darkness fell upon him. 13 God said to Abram, “Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years. 14 But I will also judge the nation whom they will serve, and afterward they will come out with many possessions. 15 As for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you will be buried at a good old age. 16 Then in the fourth generation they will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete.”
.
>> “Does God command people to commit genocide?” <<
Yes, he definitely did, with very good reason. They were a corrupted seed, not fully human.
>> “Can we worship such a God?” <<
Gladly, and abundantly!
He is the creator of all things, and failure to worship him denies our benefit of eternal life.
Why would you not want to worship him?
.
>I often wondered about the origin of child sacrifice. It seems like a stupid thing to do if a society wants to thrive.
It’s a social status thing. The upper class wants to distinguish themselves from the lower classes so they pick a practice the lower classes find disgusting. Because the upper classes are doing the new practice, it becomes high status so the lower classes copy it, so the upper class has to find a new and more disgusting thing to do to distinguish themselves again. It’s a cycle that dying civilizations get themselves into when they’re no longer worried about external foes as the late Bronze age empires were.
You can see a similar pattern in our civilization as we decline and become pozed and degenerate.
A religion with sold morals is the solution to the problem which is why the Hebrews flourished and the people’s around them collapsed.
God was longsuffering with the those who lived in Canaan before the Jews were allowed to conquer the land.
This land had been promised to Abraham and his descendants.
See Gen 15:15,16:
15”As for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you will be buried at a good old age. 16”Then in the fourth generation they will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete.”
“You” in verse 15 is Abraham.
God was allowing more time for the Canaanites to change their ways. When He removed the Jews from Egypt their task was to cleanse the land of Canann and take it for their own. Their disbelief in the desert casued a forty year delay in that action until Joshua took them across the Jordan after the death of Moses.
The Lord continually told of the destruction that was coming to the inhabitants of Canaan, especially to Moses and Joshua.
The Jewish people were warned no to intermarry because of the Canaanites false gods, their worship of idols, their worship orgies, and their sacrifice of their children to Moloch and Baal by fire.
Although initially the Jews adhered to such direction, they continually backslid until the northern 10 tribes(Israel) were deported to Ninevah by the Assyrians in 722 BC; and then the southern two tribes deported to Babylon in 606 BC/597 BC and 586 BC.
Remember God was willing to relent and not destroy Sodom and Gomorrah(and Admah and Zeboiim) if there were 10 righteous people.
Only Lot, his wife and two daughters were removed by the avenging angels(Lot’s wife disobeyed and looked back, turning into a pillar of salt).
As far as the Bible goes, it is true—every word.
And it tells an amazing story.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.