Christians try to Explain
"Un-Holy Books" in the Bible
( Share With Others )
Old Testament of "Violence"
(Joshua. 11:23): “"The Holy Land had rest from war”
and "Joshua had utterly destroyed” and “left nothing undone”.
Well, “Moses commanded” (Joshua. 11:12, 15, 20).
(Joshua. 23:12) in the same book it makes clear - Canaanite nations still remained - and Israel shouldn’t make covenantal alliances with them.
The command “you shall utterly destroy [the Canaanites]” (Deut. 20:17) is horrible to both atheists as well as many Bible-believers.
They say, "God had to step into our world at some point, Scripture recounts how God enters into a messy world—a story of divine—human interaction that “tells what this decision costs God.”
"Whether against Israel or the Canaanites, divine severity “is part of a whole concessionary scheme of operation, an accommodation to the fact of rampant evil which he detests but has not abolished.”
But The New Testament authorities affirm, without apology — God was behind the driving out of the Canaanites (Acts 7:45; 13:19; Heb. 11:30-34; Jas. 2:25).
“Genocide” or “Ethnic-Cleansing”?
Old Testament scholar Kenton Sparks says — Israel drove out the Canaanites “simply because they were pagans.”
But if so why not also include the Philistines?
But NO, Amos 1-2 is clear God brings judgment on any nation that persists in acting wickedly, including God’s people; this applies to relenting from judgment (Jer. 18:7-10).
And the Canaanites were God’s enemy—not Israel’s— because of their immoral practices. And God would become Israel’s enemy too if they became “Canaanized”: “I will act with wrathful hostility against you” (Lev. 26:28; cf. 20:23).
Segregation & Racism
Does The Old Testament promote segregation and racism?
Old Testament scholar David Firth argues — "Emotive terms such as “ethnic cleansing” or “genocide” are “inappropriate” because “only combatants are killed and an alternative way was always available.”
God’s main concern was Canaanite identity (detestable acts, false worship), NOT Canaanites themselves.
John and Harvey Walton use the parallel of the Allies destroying Nazi symbols, leaders, and ideology—even though most of the de-Nazified German people would be left alone.
Likewise, God was more concerned with destroying the harm and ruin identity that could lead Israel into sin and covenant-breaking with him.
Deuteronomy chapter 7: The language of both “destruction” and then not intermarrying with the Canaanites indicates, (according to Gordon Wenham), “more of rhetoric than literal demand. . . . It is evident the destruction of Canaanite religion is more important than destroying the people.”
Rahab (Joshua. 6:22-23), Canaanite “strangers” from Shechem at a covenant-renewal ceremony (Josh. 8:33, 35), and Israel’s treaty with the Gibeonites (Joshua. 9) illustrate the grace shown to Canaanites.
They had forty years to think about God’s wonders in Egypt (Joshua. 2:9-13), the Canaanite cities could have attempted to make peace with Israel, but they refused (Josh. 11:19).
Defenders of the Bible say:
"Ethnicity or tribal identity is irrelevant—so, “NO GENOCIDE!”
And . . "God has long-range saving purposes for the enemies of Israel, though, even if in the short-run God must judge them."
(Psalms. 87:4; Zechariah 9:2–7 9:2–7; cf. Isaiah. 19:25)
So put the blame of the Israelies on the Canaanites?
"Furthermore, the fledgling nation of Israel was highly susceptible to the influences of Canaanite immorality and idolatry; its identity-preservation was essential to keep its mission to bless the nations from being derailed."
Atheists ~ find many more reasons to reject God and the believers in the Bible are deeply troubled because this conflicts with God’s goodness.
Did God Commanded Genocide?
Theologian John Calvin and New Testament scholar G.K. Beale says:
“Yes!” It was the one, unique, and unrepeatable instance of it in salvation-history."
He says: "God did so after waiting patiently for over half a millennium":
(Gen. 15:16) before he says “That’s enough!” Only then did he punish the Canaanites who engaged in incest, bestiality, infant sacrifice, and ritual prostitution—acts that would be considered criminal in any modern society. They should have known better, but they were “disobedient” (Heb. 11:31).
Others within the church - like theologian Greg Boyd - say:
"God could not have commanded Israel to drive out the Canaanites; "these commands were simply the product of the fallen, barbaric, violence-prone minds of ancient authorities like Moses and Joshua: “thus says Moses”—not “the Lord.”
By contrast, a large number of scholars — reject actual genocide was commanded or took place.
Combatant warfare, YES — but not wholesale killing of women and children.
Such sweeping language was rhetorical and part of the ancient Near Eastern hyperbolic “trash talk”—much like our sports trash talk (“we totally annihilated that team!”).
This becomes evident on closer examination of both the biblical text and the ancient Near Eastern war texts, history, and archaeological discovery.
New Testament of "Violence"
Jesus and Violence
Both testaments affirm “the kindness and SEVERITY of God” (Rom. 11:22; cf. Ex. 34:6-7).
Jesus reveals God’s loving character (John 14:9), but wrath and judgment are not opposed to it but because of God’s love when humans are violated and dehumanized.
In the Old Testament, wicked humans are described as “violent [hamas],” not God (Old Testament Genesis: 6:11; Ps. 11:5).
Jesus himself is kind (Matt. 12:20) and severe; he will rule the nations with “a rod of iron” (Rev. 12:5).
He threatens lethal judgment on the false prophetess Jezebel and her followers; he will “strike [them] dead” (Rev. 2:20-23).
The best Greek manuscripts of Jude 5 use a Christological lens on the Old Testament: “Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, later destroyed those who did not believe” (Jude 5).
The Lamb of God is wrathful and fierce (Rev. 6:16)—good but not safe.
John Goldingay writes that the strong language of Deuteronomy “was only being realistic in recognizing the power of Canaanite temptation when Israelite faith in Yahweh was a newly budded flower.”[11]
As God’s plan to save the nations through Israel hung in the balance, a kind of spiritual warfare is in place—much like God’s battling against Egypt’s deities through in the plagues (Exodus. 12:12).
Without God’s severe actions against Egypt, there would have been no exodus, no conquest, no Israel.
So, strange as it seems, the world’s destiny depends on Israel: “As Jesus put it in John 4, salvation is from the Jews. Therefore, no Jews, no salvation—and, further, “Jesus is Jewish. No Jews, no Jesus.”
War Texts, Hyperbole, and “Extermination” Language
The claim that God commanded Canaanite “extermination” is mistaken; it fails to take ancient Near Eastern war-text rhetoric into consideration. Also, the plain affirmations of the biblical text shows a gradual taking of the land through disabling raids and then retreating to the base camp at Gilgal without holding those places (Josh. 10:15, 43).[14] It wasn’t a massive destruction of Canaanite cities and homes (e.g., Deut. 6:10-11; 7:22; 9:1), and only three cities (Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were burned).
Commonly-used terms—leaving “no survivor” or “anything that breathes”—are called “merisms” (sweeping, totalizing exaggerations). As I point out in my books, Egyptian pharaohs and other rulers used language like “perished completely, as though they never existed, like the ashes”; “were made non-existent”; “has utterly perished for always.” But we know from history that these were exaggerations.
Also, the term haram (sometimes translated “utterly destroy”) can be understood in different ways depending on the context. God’s promises to “utterly destroy” Judah (Jer. 25:9-11) simply means Judah will go into exile. Sometimes it just means comprehensive victory ,not extermination.[15] Sometimes the term could mean “devoted” or “consecrated,” but without involving destruction or death of a servant or animal, but they are set aside for priestly service (Lev. 27:21–28).
As we look at many biblical texts, we see language of “annihilation” and “no annihilation” side by side. Here is a sampling:
- Joshua 10:33: Joshua “defeated” the king of Gezer and “left him no survivor.”
- Judges 1:29: “Ephraim did not drive out the Canaanites who were living in Gezer; so the Canaanites lived in Gezer among them.” King Solomon would eventually capture Gezer (1 Kings 9:16).
Compare similar: “annihilation-no annihilation” scenarios in Joshua 10:39 with 11:21 (the inhabitants of Debir) or Judges 1:8 with 1:21 (the Jebusites).
Excuses they give for violence in their UN-Holly books.
