(By Mr Gilbert Lok)

 

"Gilbert is a Local Preacher at Aldersgate Methodist Church. He graduated from Trinity Theological College and is now undertaking further training in New Testament at Oxford University. Upon his return, he hopes to serve in the pastoral ministry."

Abstract
In the Old Testament, the Israelites are commanded to annihilate the Canaanites and inherit the land. This is a difficult text, for genocide is horrendous. This article explains why these particular commands do not apply to Christians today, even though other Biblical principles remain valid. It clarifies how to take these passages seriously, without treating them literally or as mere fictions. It examines how the Bible holds the tension between God as merciful and God as judge. Taken together, these indicate that the genocide passages need not result in a distrust of the Bible.

-----------------

Nazi Germany 1939-1945

Cambodia 1975-1979

Guatemala 1981-1983

Rwanda 1994

Bosnia 1995

These are examples of genocide, defined by the United Nations as action intended “to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”. Reading up about these incidents will make the stomach churn and the mind reel. Genocide is horrendous, and we know it.

Now read some of these passages:

Ex 23.23-33

Num 21.1-3

Deut 2.31-35, 3.1-7, 7.1-6, 9.1-5, 12.29-32, 20.16-18, 25.19

Josh 6.21, 8.24-29, 10.40, 11.12-14

1Sam 15.1-33.

They are difficult to bear, aren’t they? Our deeply held moral intuitions tell us, rightly, that we should feel sorely troubled by these texts. It is important, before leaping to defend God, to acknowledge how truly terrible genocide is. Only then can we move from moral gut reaction to mindful reflection: are these genocide texts reason to distrust and disregard the Bible and the God it presents?

--------------

Imagine this scenario. It’s a bright and breezy day. You’re driving down a familiar road in your cozy Mazda 2, humming along to U2’s ‘Beautiful Day’ while enjoying the trumpet trees blooming in pinks and whites.

Suddenly, the sun gets a bit darker. A tall, bulky rubbish truck draws alongside on your left, barely keeping in its own lane. You reflexively edge toward your right, when you notice a large a 40-foot container truck accelerating from behind on the right lane. You nudge the steering back left, subconsciously tightening your grip. Your focus is simple: don’t collide either on the left or the right.

This scenario is like reading the Bible. We are thrilled by the miracles and awed by God’s love and grace. But then we run into difficult texts like these. We start to feel disturbed. We feel hemmed in. Will we make it safely to our destination? Or will we crash either into the container truck of ‘do everything’, or the rubbish truck of ‘reject everything’?

‘Reject everything’ is a simple way to resolve the moral distress arising from the genocide texts. Some strident atheists conclude from such passages that the Bible is not merely untrue, but dangerously toxic and must be rejected wholesale. (Not all atheists make this argument, to be clear.) Others relegate these uncomfortable passages to a lower tier, as did Marcion in the 2nd century, who rejected the Old Testament because its violent and angry God seemed too different from the Father of Jesus. Crash! It’s the rubbish truck. No wonder Christians who take Scripture seriously get upset.

Others end up smashing into the container truck. Having tremendous respect for Scripture, they seek to obey every command in it. But Hofreiter (chap.6) has illustrated how the genocide passages have unfortunately served as a backdrop or an after-the-fact justification for violence. Sometimes misapplying Scripture can be far worse than not applying it.

Can a collision be avoided? Look at Deut 20.10-15, and then Deut 20.16-18. These passages make clear that the annihilation command is limited only to specific groups in a specific context. The eradication of enemies is simply not the norm for all Israelite warfare. These annihilation commands were not to be applied for other cities. Since, outside of a limited context, the genocide commands did not apply even for ancient Israel, all the more so, they definitely do not apply to Christians today.

It is a general principle that not every Biblical command has timeless applicability. Several others, from both Testaments, include: ‘Don’t wear mixed-fabric clothing’ (Lev 19.19), ‘Stone the adulterer’ (Deut 22.22), ‘Bring my cloak’ (2Tim 4.13), ‘If your eye leads you into sin, gouge it out’ (Matt 18.9).

Hence, we cannot simply assume the direct application of every Biblical instruction. Rather, we must first understand each passage in its proper context and in light of the whole Bible, under the guidance of other faithful, wise Christians who have preceded us. We also need to consider not just the letter of the commands but the principles underlying them, and to establish the comparability of contemporary and Biblical situations. As there is no room in this article to further elaborate, the interested reader is pointed to the reference materials listed below. In sum: there is simply no basis to take the genocide commands as relevant today, nor to use them to justify contemporary acts of violence.

This in no way implies that all biblical commands are irrelevant. It is a logical fallacy to go from ‘some of these do not apply’ (a truth) to ‘all of these do not apply’ (a falsity). Numerous commands in both Old and New Testaments retain a timeless quality, including ‘pray constantly’ (1Thess 5.17), ‘bless those who curse you’ (Matt 5.44), ‘we ought to lay down our lives for one another’ (1Jn 3.16). These directives may also cause us discomfort, but for an entirely different reason, which is that following them entails countercultural sacrifice on our part.

“Hang on”, someone might protest, “even if the command doesn’t apply today, genocide still occurred in the time of the Israelites. And that’s still a problem”. This is an objection worth considering.

However, the same passages which command genocide also state that God would drive the Canaanites out from the land (e.g., Ex 23.28-31, Deut 9.1-4), which implies non-annihilation. Provisions were also made for the survival of Rahab’s family (Josh 6.21-25) and the Gibeonites (Josh 9.3-27). Further, some passages about Joshua’s annihilation of entire city populations (e.g. Josh 10.38-39), are followed just a few chapters later with descriptions of how those cities remained to be conquered (Josh 15.15-16). The Amalekites were depicted as both annihilated by Saul (1Sam 15.7-20), and still present to fight against David (1Sam 27.8, 30.1). Read holistically, the occurrence of genocide seems less extensive than a cursory reading might suggest.

And so appear a second pair of heavy vehicles. The cement mixer of absolute literalness on the right, and the excavation truck of unreliable fictionality on the left. Staying in the middle lane means understanding the Bible as more than mere folklore, while recognising that taking Scripture seriously doesn’t always mean taking it literally.

Consider passages as Isa 19.1, Lk 14.26, Mk 1.4, or Acts 2.5. God does not literally ride on a cloud, nor is Jesus commanding us to hate our parents. Neither did every single person in Judea and Jerusalem visit John the Baptist, nor were Yayoi or Mayans (ancient peoples of present-day Japan and Central America respectively) present in Jerusalem at Pentecost. The point is: the Bible contains hyperbole, which is an exaggerated figure of speech used for the sake of emphasis or poetic expression. Taking hyperbole literally would be to misinterpret the intention of the human and divine authors of Scripture. Respecting the genre and context of a passage is key. To have a high view of Scripture mean knowing when not to take it literally.

There does seem to be some evidence that the genocide passages were hyperbolic, given the plurality of descriptions above and the fact that hyperbolic war rhetoric was commonplace in that region and era. Several recent authors (Wolterstorff, Copan and Flanagan, Webb and Oeste) argue for this, and while no interpretive theory is without problems, their views are worthy of serious consideration. Their arguments are important resources in preventing a collision with the cement mixer of rigid literalness.

The hyperbole view is also an important alternative to the proposal that Joshua’s Conquest and the associated genocide was simply a fictional construction. Some scholars, relying on archaeological findings, assert that the Conquest (and hence genocide) never occurred at all, but was an imagined narrative created to bolster Israel’s national identity. This may evade the genocide problem, but creates a new one concerning the nature of Scripture.

On the other hand, as excavations continue and new evidence appears, more recent studies seem to indicate fewer inconsistencies with the Biblical account than earlier research suggested. Overall, the data remains far from conclusive and there is no perfect fit with any model. Regardless, it must be recognised that the Bible is not a history book in the modern sense, but is a theological account which interprets events via the lens of faith. Scripture, therefore, is not purely historical in genre, but neither is it entirely ahistorical. These passages do not need to be read as mere fabrications ex nihilo (out of nothing), but as literary and theological reflections of pivotal moments in the history of Israel as God’s people.

The astute reader will at this point notice a third problem: even if hyperbole was present, a good amount of harsh warfare still occurred. And whether or not genocide was fully executed by the Israelites, isn’t it still a problem that God commanded such an atrocious deed? That doesn’t seem compatible with a loving God. We see yet another pair of heavy vehicles: on one side a school bus, on the other a military tank.

For Marcion and others, the genocide texts are simply incompatible with the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels, one who is compassionate, gentle, and loving. Unfortunately, that is a caricature of Jesus. Numerous passages (Mt 10.34-36, Mt 23.1-36, Mt 24.45-51, Lk 19.11-27, Jn 2.13-17, Jn 5.26-30) show that Jesus was remembered by the earliest church as more than just a mild and serene sage. Similarly, Revelation depicts Jesus as both victim and ultimate victor (Rev 5.6-14, 19.11-16). We must avoid crashing into the school bus on the left: thinking of God as no more than a doting parent.

Please don’t misunderstand – God is indeed a loving Father, but he is more than just that. He is also a warrior and a judge. The sinfulness of the Canaanites is given as an explicit reason for the genocide and expulsion commands (Deut 9:4-5, 12:29-31, 18:12). Further, the Israelites themselves are not exempt from God’s judgment. God likewise makes war against Israel on account of their own sins (Lev 26.14-33, Deut 28.15-68, Jer 9.10-16). The severity of God’s punishment falls on his own people too.

God is indeed a judge, but he is more than just that. As Webb and Oeste (chap.14) point out, when God first revealed himself on Mt Sinai (Ex 34.6-7), elements of both mercy and justice were present, with noticeably more emphasis on the former. We must likewise avoid crashing into the military tank on the right: thinking of God as no more than a vengeful punisher.

In the end, mind boggling as it may initially seem, we can acknowledge that the severity of God’s judgement is congruent with His loving mercy. The Bible itself holds this tension throughout its pages, and nowhere do God’s kindness and God’s justice meet more closely than when God himself suffered on a Roman cross.

I conclude by noting that this article has only outlined the most basic elements without addressing all options, objections, and counter-proposals. Much more could be said on this complex issue; the interested reader is directed to the references below.

Nevertheless, this article has highlighted how the genocide command was a specifically limited one which is absolutely not applicable today. This does not invalidate other Biblical principles which retain a timeless applicability. We can avoid both the ‘do everything’ container truck, and the ‘do nothing’ rubbish truck.

We have also seen that the commands of annihilation sit side-by-side with less severe instances of expulsion and assimilation. Some degree of hyperbole may be at work in the text, and hyperbole is not the same as fiction. We can avoid both the cement mixer of absolute literalness, and the excavation truck of unreliable fictionality.

We have gone beyond the genocide texts to consider what the whole of Scripture says about God’s mercy and his execution of judgment. Since God is both lover and judge, we can hold this tension, and avoid hitting either school bus or tank.

We have kept in the middle lane, avoiding the temptation to react by swinging to either pole. We have questioned these troubling episodes, and have not found in them adequate reasons to dismiss or distrust the Bible. We have practiced reading these passages carefully and holistically, and in so doing, have become a little more adept at discerning the Bible’s implications for today.

References

The Genocide Commands

Copan, Paul, and Matthew Flannagan. 2014. Did God Really Command Genocide?: Coming To Terms With The Justice Of God. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Cowles, C. S., Eugene H. Merrill, Daniel L. Gard, and Tremper III Longman. 2003. Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Hofreiter, Christian. 2018. Making Sense of Old Testament Genocide : Christian Interpretations of Herem Passages. Oxford Theology and Religion Monographs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kennedy, Michael T. 2016. ‘Canaan, Conquest Of.’ In Lexham Bible Dictionary, edited by John D. Barry, David Bomar, Derek R. Brown, Rachel Klippenstein, Douglas Mangum, Carrie Sinclair Wolcott, Lazarus Wentz, Elliot Ritzema, and Wendy Widder. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

Meier, S.A. 2005. ‘History of Israel 1: Settlement Period’. In Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books, edited by Bill T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Ortiz, S.M. 2005. ‘Archaeology: Syro-Palestinian’. In Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books, edited by Bill T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Seibert, Eric A. 2016. ‘Recent Research on Divine Violence in the Old Testament (with Special Attention to Christian Theological Perspectives)’. Currents in Biblical Research 15 (1): 8–40.

Stump, Eleonore. 2010. ‘The Problem of Evil and the History of Peoples: Think Amalek’. In Divine Evil?: The Moral Character of the God of Abraham, edited by Michael Bergmann, Michael J Murray, and Michael C Rea, 179–208. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Webb, William J., and Gordon K. Oeste. 2019. Bloody, Brutal, and Barbaric: War Texts That Trouble the Soul. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 2010. ‘Reading Joshua’. In Divine Evil?: The Moral Character of the God of Abraham, edited by Michael Bergmann, Michael J Murray, and Michael C Rea, 236–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Reading, Interpreting, and Applying Scripture

Bacote, Vincent E., Laura Miguelez Quay, and Dennis L. Okholm, eds. 2004. Evangelicals & Scripture: Tradition, Authority and Hermeneutics. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Brown, Jeannine K. 2007. Scripture as Communication: Introducing Biblical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Cosgrove, Charles H. 2002. Appealing to Scripture in Moral Debate: Five Hermeneutical Rules. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Fee, Gordon D., and Douglas Stuart. 2014. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. 4th ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Goldingay, John. 1994. Models for Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans.

Hollinger, Dennis P. 2002. Choosing the Good: Christian Ethics in a Complex World. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Kaiser Jr., Walter C., Daniel M. Doriani, Kevin J. Vanhoozer, William J. Webb, Mark L. Strauss, Al Wolters, and Christopher J. H. Wright. 2009. Four Views on Moving beyond the Bible to Theology. Edited by Gary T. Meadors. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic.

Strauss, Mark L. 2011. How to Read the Bible in Changing Times: Understanding and Applying God’s Word Today. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.