If God is love, how do we explain the Old Testament passages where he commands the Israelites to eradicate entire groups of people, even the children (Josh 9:24; Num 31; 1 Sam 15)? Sometimes people say it was to punish these people for their evil practices, like child sacrifice. Well, child sacrifice is certainly a terrible thing. But does it make sense to punish child sacrifice by killing all the children?
Let’s think about this for a moment. When cultures engaged in child sacrifice, it’s not because they just loved killing children — it’s because they believed it served as some kind of propitiation, appeasing their gods for the greater good. So if God didn’t approve of child sacrifice, what seems like the most rational way to deal with it: (1) kill everyone, including all the children you don’t want killed, or (2) make yourself known to these people as the one true god and tell them that child sacrifice is not what you want? Wouldn’t option 2 be a win-win scenario?
Here’s something else to consider. If God didn’t like child sacrifice, why did he command Abraham to offer his son Isaac as one? Granted, he stopped the sacrifice before the boy was killed, but isn’t this a weird command for a deity who despises child sacrifice? And what about Psalm 137, where the inspired writer is lamenting Babylon’s destruction of Jerusalem and says the following:
8 O daughter of Babylon, who are to be destroyed,
Happy the one who repays you as you have served us!
9 Happy the one who takes and dashes
Your little ones against the rock!
Furthermore, if God wanted the Canaanites destroyed because of their heinous practices, why stop at Canaan? There were many cultures that engaged in terrible practices like this from time to time — why not send the Israelites to slaughter them all? Instead this “judgment” is only brought against people in the same geographic location that God wanted the Israelites to inhabit:
After the death of Moses the servant of the Lord, it came to pass that the Lord spoke to Joshua the son of Nun, Moses’ assistant, saying: 2 “Moses My servant is dead. Now therefore, arise, go over this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them—the children of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot will tread upon I have given you, as I said to Moses. 4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon as far as the great river, the River Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and to the Great Sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your territory. 5 No man shall be able to stand before you all the days of your life; as I was with Moses, so I will be with you. I will not leave you nor forsake you. 6 Be strong and of good courage, for to this people you shall divide as an inheritance the land which I swore to their fathers to give them.
— Josh 1:1-5So they answered Joshua and said, “Because your servants were clearly told that the Lord your God commanded His servant Moses to give you all the land, and to destroy all the inhabitants of the land from before you; therefore we were very much afraid for our lives because of you, and have done this thing.”
— Josh 9:24
How strange that these passages focus on taking the land from the Canaanites and not on their evil natures…
As a final consideration, even if the only thing left to do with these evil Canaanites was kill them all, does it make sense that God would choose the cruelest and most agonizing way to do it? Instead of speaking them out of existence, or immediately striking them all dead, he has them besieged by invaders. They’re forced to watch their loved ones being massacred before being hacked to death themselves. Would God really command this?
How does a god who would command genocide on this scale differ from the vilest despots of the modern era? What’s the difference between this god and bin Laden? What’s the difference between a god like this and a devil? Could a god this bloody be right?
Finding Truth 
Nate,
Yes, seriously.
To be an atheist means you believe in the absurdity that everything happened all by itself.
That means atheism is a hoax just like all the other hoaxes you believe in:
global warming, ObamaCare, overpopulation, energy shortage, abortion (mass murder of the innocent unborn, by the way), DDT, solar and wind energy, that government is the source of justice and so, can cure man of his evil nature which spawns poverty, starvation, hatred, and crime and every sort of social unrest.
Unfortunately, all those atheist hoaxes are now mainstream. And just look how they’re tearing our society apart.
Of course, the atheist response to all that is George Bush did it.
LikeLike
The Bible does contain some great literature, and it’s undeniably a cultural and historical treasure. That’s very different from saying God wrote it though.
Look, I get it posts like this one probably seem flippant and insulting. I don’t mean for it to be, but I can see how it comes across that way. Honestly, it’s hard to give criticism without hurting feelings sometimes.
These stories of genocide didn’t really bother me, once upon a time. But the more I thought about it and tried to put myself in those people’s shoes (even the Israelites who would have had to carry this out), I realized that something was wrong with all of it. A God who embodies love and gives the command “thou shalt not kill” should abhor genocide, not command it.
If you’d like to see how I once thought about this, check out this link (though I’m quite a shamed of it now):
https://findingtruth.wordpress.com/2006/12/18/its-not-fair-the-god-of-the-old-testament-vs-the-god-of-the-new-testament/
And this comment on it made a real impact on me:
https://findingtruth.wordpress.com/2006/12/18/its-not-fair-the-god-of-the-old-testament-vs-the-god-of-the-new-testament/#comment-595
LikeLike
Nate, where do these people come from that invade your Blog ? They profess to be Christian but act like total buttheads.
Here is an example
non-believer: why does God order the slaying of babies in the OT ?
Christian: Pokes non-believer in the eyes and then says, ” you atheist ! You are a moron and you don’t know how to read the bible . You have taken this out of context and you have to look at the language, culture , and other things. Also God is in control and we don’t always know his ways. Atheists are liberals and they always show their ignorance with questions like this. How stupid of you to ask !
LikeLike
“There is no political reason for genocide. Genocide is the evil that results when atheists are left by their little lonesomes to run things.”
ROFl….okay they will be shocked to see me write that thats just a little over the top even for me. However only a little. I do believe for all the talk that if you removed theism from the history of civilizations this world would be untold carnage. The thing is even Nate’s sensibility of genocide being wrong is a result of growing up in a Christianized culture.
LikeLike
KC,
Using absurdity to demonstrate absurdity is not being a butt head. It is a way demonstrating just how biased, judgmental and intolerant are the acolytes of atheism.
It’s okay for the atheist to ridicule the Bible, Christianity and the basic facts of history, but when the tables are turned, even in the most civil way as was done here, the atheist cries foul and throws a fit of indignation.
LikeLike
“It’s okay for the atheist to ridicule the Bible, Christianity and the basic facts of history, but when the tables are turned, even in the most civil way as was done here, the atheist cries foul and throws a fit of indignation.”
Totally Agreed. My first post here where I dared to say “atheist tend to” was taken with outrage when in fact the entire blog is dedicated to antichristian rhetoric whether in blog post or in blog comments.
LikeLike
SOM, I asked you a basic question. No where did I ridicule the bible, Christianity or the basic facts of history. Even your buddy TBlacksmon thinks your comments are a little over the top.
“but when the tables are turned, even in the most civil way as was done here”
Where have you ever been civil ???
No need to reply. You are a lost cause and have zero credibility.
LikeLike
“Even your buddy TBlacksmon thinks your comments are a little over the top.”
Emphasis on little. don’t look to me for support. You have PLENTY of places you have ridiculed the Bible and PLENTY of places you are outraged at getting your own views ridiculed
LikeLike
Mike, thanks for the straight-forward answer.
Granted, people still break the rules sometimes, even when they know what they are. But wouldn’t you agree that in most situations, when people know the rules, a greater majority of them don’t break them going forward? For instance, if we compared two classrooms — one where there’s no rule about staying in your seat and another where that is a rule, do you suppose the classroom with the rule would have more kids sitting in their seats? You’ll always have some who don’t follow the rule, even when they know it. But (as GI Joe used to say) “knowing is half the battle.” So it seems to me that it would have been in everyone’s best interest for God to continue the one-on-one communication.
People have this misguided idea that sin really isn’t really sinful its just people not knowing better. Thats not anything with substantial proof and the shocking view of the Bible is that even when God does one day manifest himself the response in revelations is that they turn weapons against him
I think it depends. Some people knowingly break the rules; others don’t.
This is an important point — it’s actually how I viewed it as a Christian too. What strikes me as problematic about these examples, though, is that it goes so way over the top. It’s almost like getting a ding on your car, but then being so angry you take a sledge hammer to the rest of it. If they’re really being punished for child sacrifice, why kill all of them, even the children? Granted, as a father, I don’t much like that idea any better — the notion of someone killing my wife and me, but then raising my children as their own. But why must anyone be killed anyway? Why not simply tell the Canaanites that this isn’t necessary? People did not perform child sacrifice because they liked it, but because they thought it was necessary.
Yes, I agree with you here. I don’t think there was much difference between the Jewish tribal god and the Canaanite gods, but through the evolution of Judaism and Christianity, El / Yahweh / Jehovah has become far preferable.
That’s a fair criticism — I see what you’re saying. But try to keep in mind that we don’t see it that way. We don’t believe that all the good things in life came from this god — if we did, then we would probably see things the way you do. Instead, we see issues like these as reasons for being skeptical of this god.
I know you don’t see it that way, and I don’t expect you to. I think you would probably concede that these passages are problematic, but like you said, you are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt because of the good things about Christianity. I honestly don’t have an argument with that. One of my good friends, Kent, who commented earlier views it that way. I consider his point of view, and he considers mine, but we see the big picture differently.
So from my perspective, can you see why I find such passages problematic?
Thanks again for approaching my question on this in the way you did.
LikeLike
“I don’t believe KC will ever pick up a greek dictionary to begin that journey if he did he might figure out one of the meanings of the word evil is bad or hurtful and yeah when god judges you it isn’t a good thing”
I wasn’t asking for the definition of evil. I was asking who in the scriptures I listed was causing evil. It’s a very simple question to which there is a simple answer.
OK let’s do it this way. Who caused the bad and hurtful things in the scriptures I listed ? Does this make everyone feel warm & fuzzy now ?
LikeLike
KC,
The only way to the discuss anything profitably is if there exists common ground.
Concerning the Bible, the atheists assigns his own meaning to it instead of letting the text do its own speaking.
One day, maybe you could sit down to read the Bible and let it speak to you. That’s the way to read any literature, in fact.
The tendency is to start out with preconceived beliefs and then judge meaning by how the literature conforms to the preconceptions.
The way atheists apply their preconceptions to the Bible makes it impossible for the atheist to understand anything the Bible actually says.
Learning happens best in a clear, open, silence of mind.
LikeLike
KC,
Without suffering (another name for evil) there would be no life on Earth.
So as terrible as suffering can be, it is inherently good.
Consequently, if God causes some sort of evil, the end, or objective is the good.
Nevertheless, human ethics don’t work that way. It is not ethical to commit evil in order to do good.
The error the atheist makes it to apply finite human ethics to God Almighty who is infinite.
The result will always be absurdity.
Ergo the atheist critique of the Bible is always absurd.
LikeLike
What about Heaven, SOM? Will there be suffering there too?
LikeLike
SOM , you keep referring to atheists. I have never professed to being an atheist. I was a devout christian for over 40 years although Mike / TBlacksman feels this is impossible. I am now a non-believer / agnostic.
Agnostic fits best, because I cannot know. And neither can you !
I know what indoctrination is all about. I was raised in a Pentecostal Home and was as fundamental as they come.
I always had questions about my faith and no one including my parents or my pastor could give satisfactory answers. I lost my faith over a 10 year period of time. I already have your T-shirt. I just no longer wear it.
@Mike / TBlacksman, “You have PLENTY of places you have ridiculed the Bible and PLENTY of places you are outraged at getting your own views ridiculed.
OK Mike, provide the evidence to your first claim. I want to see plenty of places where I have ridiculed the bible.
Your 2nd claim is true. You have been the main person who uses berating people as part of your rhetorical b.s.
LikeLike
“The tendency is to start out with preconceived beliefs and then judge meaning by how the literature conforms to the preconceptions.” — SOM
Question: Is this true of a person who has never been exposed to the bible? Someone whose first exposure to Christianity is via the bible? If there is no preconception, how can that person make judgments?
LikeLike
Nan,
Learning is not about making judgments.
Correct and true judgment can only be made after much learning.
The story of the Hebrews wandering in the desert for 40 years on their way to the promised land is analogous to the spiritual journey an person must take when he approaches God Almighty.
The atheist is lazy and prideful and wants quick answers.
God Almighty who speaks in the silence is almost imperceptible to man who must spend his entire life with humbly inclined ear.
LikeLike
Nate,
The great thing about great literature is that it is not necessary to believe in the author.
Yet the Bible dazzles.
And that is what lends credibility to the claim of divine authorship.
Nevertheless, without believing in God, the ethics in the book of Leviticus, for example, are stunning in their justice which can be applied to all of mankind.
And the teachings of Moses and Jesus are stupendous even if one is without faith in God.
The teachings of the Bible, its wisdom, it’s modeling of God, man and universe can provide common moral, ethical and philosophical common ground for all men.
LikeLike
Appreciate your comment but it doesn’t answer my question. Please read it carefully (in relation to your statement) and try again.
LikeLike
Nan,
I can’t try again because I answered your question completely.
Maybe you have a preconception that requires I respond to you in a certain way.
All I can do is respond to you in my own way.
Communication can take place when minds meet on common ground.
LikeLike
“Granted, people still break the rules sometimes, even when they know what they are. But wouldn’t you agree that in most situations, when people know the rules, a greater majority of them don’t break them going forward? ”
Thats to the extent that a society enforces those rules Nate. Let me ask you a question. WHat do you think would be the result if in the US if we disbanded our police force and closed our judicial system and you had ZERO chance of getting caught? I’d give it 3 months and we’d collapse in every conceivable way and not just in violent crime either.
” But why must anyone be killed anyway? Why not simply tell the Canaanites that this isn’t necessary? People did not perform child sacrifice because they liked it, but because they thought it was necessary.”
au contraire.We don’t like to believe it but humanity is capable of enjoying a great deal of carnage. I have no doubt that parents of the kids might have been torn but there is alot in our history that indicates we are not all that cut up over others pain.
We are finally getting down to a conversation where we might in fact make some progress though. I submit to you the heart of the problem is that you have an an entirely different sociological view of Humanity than God does. I think its a nice idea that if you just talk to people they would listen I just don’t think its real.
“Yes, I agree with you here. I don’t think there was much difference between the Jewish tribal god and the Canaanite gods, ”
Well no you don’t because you pretty much ignore that the reason the Jewish God sanctioned the behaviour was for equal judgement of doing such things in the first place and not as the canaanite Gods did without reference to getting what you did done back to you as an object lesson to others.
“But try to keep in mind that we don’t see it that way. We don’t believe that all the good things in life came from this god ”
and hence the folly of your logic because you take what you want from the text and then bow out on the context of who the text is talking about in God. this is what I referred to before. If you consider the text secular then fine deal with it as such across the board but what atheists do is duck into the the theological narrative to make their point on how the Chrsitan god is evil and sadistic (for the emotional appeal)and then duck out of the theology when theological points are raised against their position.
I am going to bet that there is someone in your life who if they did an atrocity you would look for a reason PRECISELY because of everything else you know of them. perhaps its your children or your wife. I know with my children if in the future one of them should commit a murder my first instinct would be to question the one murdered not merely because of my love for my children but because of what I KNOW about them. Now what would happen if I had the data of their goodness multiplied. Lets say they had risked their lives for others in the past, worked to feed the homeless, wept bitterly at even animals being killed, worked tirelessly to assist rape victims. slept at the feet of injured children.
Then you hear they gunned down a father and son in a alley? They confessed to it and told you “dad you know I work for the government and I know some things that you and the Media don’t know”. I don’t know about you nate but I would think all those other things would incline me to give them the benefit of the doubt. I really doubt I would throw al the other stuff through the window and define them on that isolated action given I don’t know all the details.
With God the whole thing is multiplied by thousands. Creator of a laughter, designer of families, Architect of love, character that weaved the whole story just so he could die on a cross for all of us. You slash that out of the narrative in order to use isolated acts of thousands of years ago to judge him on things you have no full grasp of and we don’t and won’t
We approach it just as you would a love one who you know better of. We think the odds are really good with the track record of creating beautiful and good things that the issue lies with the people who never offered any of those things and yes even of the children if he knew they would never offer it either.
“So from my perspective, can you see why I find such passages problematic?”
No Nate I can’t. Jarring to your sensibilities outside of being there perhaps but not problematic.Why? because in your case you make an argument about God and then you duck out when we start to talk about what and who God is. I guess you might find capital punishment problematic also but I don’t see why it is. I think its based on some false sensibilities just as I think some of your view about God are based on the same.
LikeLike
Nate,
Evidently, suffering is inherent to our universe.
And since heaven is a divine realm outside our universe one would think that suffering does not exist there.
I don’t think about heaven much. I think a lot about how I must act in a way that bears fruit which is pleasing to God Almighty.
That I find a bit worrisome, truth be told.
LikeLike
No preconception. I just feel you missed the point of my question. No matter.
LikeLike
KC,
I went to Confession recently and told the priest that I had lived my entire life thinking like an atheist.
I had thought of myself as a Christian since I returned to the Church 20 years ago or so.
I had plugged all these biblical beliefs into my head and could reason my way to the existence of God, but still, not so deep down, I believed everything happened all by itself.
And I lived the way I believed and I believed in a reality of my own making.
But eventually I had the insight about how things are connected and woven together by the “Laws of Nature”, which come from “Nature’s God.”*
And I realized that to live a good life I had to follow the teachings of Jesus in a very deliberate, thoughtful manner, not just as a matter of thoughtless dogma.
The Christian way of life opens the human being to God’s grace. Jesus referred to that as the Pearl of great price.
It is for this reason that the Christian must meet the atheist in the arena of ideas. Civil society depends on Christian victory over the prevalent atheism that has taken over modern society.
*from the Declaration of Independence, a secular document
LikeLike
Nan,
It’s kind of like listening to another person speak.
If you have preconceived ideas you hear what you want to hear, not what the other person is actually saying.
LikeLike
“If you have preconceived ideas you hear what you want to hear, not what the other person is actually saying.”
This tends to work both ways , SOM
What you fail to realize is that Nan, Ruth, Nate, William, me and countless others already have your T-shirt. We simply can no longer wear it .
LikeLike