There is a lot of other evidence against the genocide allegation, too. One book that covers this is Paul Copan's Is God a Moral Monster? I'm not sure if all of Copan's analysis is correct, but it does have a lot of useful points.
Paul Copan constantly accuses God of accommodating wickedness, saying that things God protected were not “ideal” (aka were wicked) but that was ok because at least it was better than what would have been if God didn’t regulate it at all (aka God caves to man’s wickedness). I strongly disagree with Copans approach. My channel is dedicated to confronting so called tough Bible passages without sacrificing Gods holiness. Right now I am covering concubines and wives, but eventually will get to a war and violence series, and show God is just and right through all this.
This video is a example of beating around the bush. The question presented was, did God order the killing? It’s an easy yes or no question but yet this individual takes a full hour to blow smoke up everybody’s behind.
If the question is, "Did God command Joshua and Israel to commit genocide?", it's intellectually dishonest to change the topic and start talking about whether they actually did it. He can't bring himself to say, "Yes, He did", so he has to say that the text doesn't mean what it says. He's got nothing.
Right AND EXACTLY 💯 WHY WE'RE STILL PLAGUED RIPPED OFF AND MORE THAN HARRASSED BY THE DEMONIC DEVIL'S COCKTAILS PLOYS PLOTS AND SCHEMES OF SATAN'S OWN TO DATE BECAUSE HE KEPT AND SOLD LIVESTOCK AND LET THE"" ONE PREGNANT WITCH THAT WAS ZEZEBELS INCLEAN WOMAN WITH OUR ENEMY PEOPLE TODAY THAT GOD DOES HATE AND THEY HATE US HIS OWN GENUINE ELETE AND ELECT KINGDOM CITIZENS RIGHTFUL HIERS OF JESUS CHRIST LAMB OF GOD'S THRONE AND NONE OF THESE NOT LESS THAN NEW EGYPT ARGUING OVER WHO'S WHO AND WANT ISLAM ROMAN EMPIRE CATHOLIC CHURCH PAPACY RULE GLOBALLY AND ARE THE IMPOSTERS MEANT TO CHEAT YOU PERIOD IT IS WRITTEN! THIS GUYS MURKY WATERED IMPOSTOR NO AUTHORITY FROM WHICH HE'S SPEAKING 🗣️ NUTZ
IT'S NOT NEGOTIABLE GOD'S THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER YES BETTER BELIEVE HE'S TAKING IT ALL BACK TO HIMSELF BECAUSE HE ALONE IS GOD!! THE FACT" THAT STILL PRICKS MAN'S MANKIND NO GENDER PRIDE SO THEY CONTINUE TO COMPETE HARASY RUSHING AHEAD FOR A MERE PROFIT AND CARING NOTHING FOR GOD'S TRUE SHEEP 🐑 JESUS OF NAZERETH COVERING LAND ALREADY SPOKEN FOR HER NAME IS ISRAEL
@@Taco-jitsu God can command Moses to stone homosexuals, or those who collected sticks on Sabbath. He can let the Israelites to keep the virgins for themselves after the family and the whole town had been wiped out. He can send people to hell, no matter he is a good person or not, if he doesn't believe in Jesus. He can let kids have cancer. or people be chained throughout their lives, only to mercilessly be killed in the end. He can let animals being eaten alive by other animals. You can justify this. You can reconcile this. You know what, God is love. He is never wrong, and who are we to question His wisdom? We are His creation. It's just imposibble for us to understand His knowledge.
@@ashistoxic8447 We're never absolutely certain about anything that's what makes us atheists. But our best guess is your God / Gods (Holy Trinity) is a bit of a dick
A truly educational lecture. Thank you Dr. Hess! What about in chapters 12 to the end of Joshua? Is there any evidence for the same line of thinking that genocide did not occur?
I found this very unsatisfying. I'm guessing whoever titled the video either didn't listen to it first or was fine clickbaiting. Hess himself clearly isn't interested so much in the Command from God but what was carried out or done by the Israelites irrespective of whether this fulfilled God's own indictment. He says as much at 35:53. The problem is this virtually doesn't matter in terms of the critique. If God commanded and Joshua failed to fully obey then that can easily just mean Joshua is incompetent at genocide rather than at all indicating Yahweh wasn't calling for such. The reason people struggle with this, myself included, is what it says about God, not what it says about humanity which I already know is flawed and capable of evil.
This apologist strategy seems to be arguing that the number of babies that were slaughtered could have been a small number.... in which case, it wasn't really that evil
@@christopherjimenez5537 He's an apologist that relays biblical scholarship and hermeneutics. You're an anti-intellectual naysayer similar to a young earth creationist in response to an apologist defending evolution. THAT's less than zero
Are you pro choice or prolife? Many athiests believe it is ok to slay millions of fetuses because it's on their own terms. When it comes to a christian we believe that every child is precious, but in certain cases it would have been merciful before Christ to send them to heaven to live an immortal life before they could be tainted by sin. Current day this method doesn't apply because of Christ's ultimate sacrifice. Everyone now has a chance no matter where or who you come from. So in a Christians mind we believe that God has specific and righteous reasons for doing so and also because he has the authority as our all knowing creator and heavenly father. You often hear mothers saying that, "I brought them in this world, ill take them out." Why do we not question this motherly authority on a child unborn and born, but with God it's monstrous?
So the masses of women and children where not in the forts ...so therefore no innocent women and children were destroyed......right ....that’s the ticket ....
It's available for download from our Open Biola site (open.biola.edu). Search for the talk, and then download it under the "Media Options" tab directly below the video.
To the people saying, God is evil, you done bumped your head. If God is real, you never die you were born immortal you just change locations and if God wishes to change you from where he put you; too bad he’s God and guess what? You’re going to get your wish one day you will not have to hear about God ever ever ever again.
Crazy. The problem with this is that it tries to present God’s orders as some thought out legal document where you can pick over the words and define exactly what was meant. The command to kill every man, woman and child is a statement filled with emotion. Man, woman, child; man-to-woman. Meh! Spot the difference. Unleash fury!!! That’s what was meant, let’s not kid ourselves. Thank God, or whoever, they didn’t have nukes, because then it would simply read “nuke ‘em”
I am sadden to think that this is a professor. at a Christian University. For those who want to know the meaning of Joshua read John Cassian. Remember that Joshua starts by saying it is a book of the law that if you meditate on it you will have good success. So how do these stories lead us to a successful life? Cassian tell of visiting holy men in Egypt who told him that the story of Joshua is about overcoming the 7 deadly faults. Killing babies relates to not allowing even baby faults to enter our lives It goes along with the idea that the Kingdom of God is within us and that we do not wrestle against flesh and blood but against principalities and powers within our lives that need to be overcome. Pride, dejection, gluttony are the faults that I know that I have to fight against. To meditate on Joshua is to understand that there are ways and weapons we can use to overcome our faults. It makes you want to reread Joshua and realize that the clues to overcoming our faults are found in "this book of the Law".
Because that's not how it should be read. You do know exaggeration in military terms is normal in warfare 3000 years ago? That the 1000 is an exaggeration.
Great presentation and as it should be. It reminds me of constitutions writings, for example the fact that it says that every man is equal, then thieves are equal to righteous... I mean then this is one interpretation, isn't it?... So what he explains simply has a deeper meaning than straight taking the writings. This is reading between the lines as they said.
I believe that there is no flaw in God's character nor the Bible, but I gotta admit, I don't like this method of defending the Bible. I've seen it with a couple other theologians discussing the Exodus: picking apart the tiniest of nuances to try to say, "It's really not as bad as it seems." I'm sure much of what this speaker says is historically accurate and thoroughly reviewed, but it just doesn't look good. Rather, the real question that must be answered is this: "Did God have a moral right to command Israel to attack and displace the Canaanites?" The main issue that every theologian seems to be missing is that many atheists--the people using the Exodus to attack God's character--do not believe in objective right and wrong. Their sense of morality is subjective and ever-shifting, leading to the creation of concepts like cultural relativism (which, at it's most literal, could defend cruel behaviors as long as they're part of a culture) and even the universal declaration of human rights (a document defining what powerful Westerners think should be right and wrong). I'm certainly not saying these two examples are useless and should be thrown out, but they are far from perfect ideas, compared to the perfect moral code that the Old Testament and Christ define. At the end of the day, if you do not believe the Lord has the right to punish peoples who are committing great evils for generations as part of their culture, it will be hard to come to terms with the Israelites' invasion. But if you recognize that certain things--normalized child sacrifice, adultery, sexual immortality--are wrong and deserving of punishment, you will find it hard not to agree with the Lord's command, even when it seems harsh. I'm definitely still thinking over this issue, but this is the best answer I've got.
You are experiencing something called cognitive dissonance. Your humanity, reason and empathy recognize these Biblical teachings as evil. But you were raised from a young age to believe the Bible is God’s word and God is good. I hope your quest leads you to freedom and inner peace.
Humanism is a laughable concept. It is based on the fundamental principle of the value of the individual whose intrinsic worth comes from being specially created, is apart from the rest of the animal kingdom , embodied in Imago Dei. Tell Putin, Mao, Stalin, Caesar, Alexander the Great, any Chinese emperor, any tribal chief that you are as valuable as they are, and see how far that gets you. Darwin said we are just animals. When you swim in the sea of Western Enlightenment, you make irrational assumptions about other seas. Why do we have nuclear weapons? Simple: one side favors Imago Dei.
"... das heißt, zu Hitler fiel ihnen was ein. Und zum Teil ungeheuer interessante Dinge, nicht? Ganz fantastisch interessante und komplizierte und hoch über dem gewöhnlichen Niveu schwebende Dinge. Das habe ich als grotesk empfunden." -- Hannah Arendt im Gespräch mit Günter Gaus, 1964
Joshua 6:21 They utterly destroyed everything in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox and sheep and donkey, with the edge of the sword. Joshua 8:25-26 All who fell that day, both men and women, were 12,000-all the people of Ai. For Joshua did not withdraw his hand with which he stretched out the javelin until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai.Joshua 10:8 The LORD said to Joshua, “Do not fear them, for I have given them into your hands; not one of them shall stand before you.” Joshua 10:28 Now Joshua captured Makkedah on that day, and struck it and its king with the edge of the sword; he utterly destroyed it and every person who was in it. He left no survivor. Thus he did to the king of Makkedah just as he had done to the king of Jericho. Read the rest of Chapter 10 where Israel moves from city to city laying waste to all of its inhabitants. If this is not genocide someone has a problem reading. This speaker wastes so much time trying to explain a city that he is blind to see how many were destroyed in Jericho. This man is telling lies and trying to cover up what happened here through his explanations. He is also a member of a Bible translation and likewise did not translate Genesis correctly and put in a biased version of what he wanted it to mean.
Problem with reading the Bible comes from Theological stubbornness to interpret the clear words in to some intellectual philosophies in order to justify the horrors that speak volumes against benevolence of Loving God. The other problem with the Bible ist fact, most of the religious people never read the Bible... And finally, Christians still believe OT God is their God, when in reality YAHWE is not even the God of all Jewish people.... It concerns only the lineage of Isaac, who will later become Israelites. The rest of the Abraham's family doesn't count. As a matter of a fact, the commands "Kill them all"
@@rena6895 I like many scholars find it plain in old testament. Problem you have is either you don't read Bible or you refuse to acknowledge what you read. You se this theological way of interpreting Bible is atrocity. Bible is no subject to philosophy. It a Book that speaks about some particular history and some very clear laws. There is a section that is is literally called the book of the law! 613 laws, nothing about them is left unclear. You know every student of our law as we have it right now, has to learn Roman Law. It's a huge book full of laws. Bible is no different, you don't go around and make theologically philosophical questions about Roman Law. Do you understand? Bible is not there for you to interpret stuff as you like it. Bible is clear. No all what is left is for you to figure out are you still religious after you understood what Bible is telling you, can you follow?
1 Samuel 15:3 go and strike Amalek and completely destroy everything that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey... God commands the killing of children and BABIES!?!? This whole thing is a convoluted bs apologetic missing the point, misleading and downright misinterpretation bc the fact of the text is repugnant to modern sensibilities (and rightfully so). Be Christian if you will, but stop dodging the hard pressed tenets of your faith.
Thank you...but i think the point of view is about God rights. So people many talk about human rights, but how about God rights? So i agree what Prof. Richards said about "kharem". But the important question is why Kanaan People is can't refend?
So sad that even now we have people, indoctrinated as children, who will defend genocide. This is the damage religion does. Morality is the huge weakness of religion. If Christians would actually read the Bibles, we'd have a lot fewer Christians. Sadly history has had too many people like this who are ok with genocide. He's probably a decent man who's just never thought this through openly and compassionately. He's in too deep. If only history had had fewer apologists and more humanists.
@@pleaseenteraname1103That's a great defence when anyone dares to disagree, eh? Yet you can't address my points. Well, ok, we have a challenger. Why is genocide ok then? See if you can succeed instead.
Interesting how apparently sane persons can tie themselves in knots trying to rationalize bronze-age morality because it comes as part and parcel of their system of superstitious beliefs. Whatever happened to "turn the other cheek"? If God can't make up His mind, how can we?
So sad that even now we have people, indoctrinated as children, who will defend genocide. This is the damage religion does. Morality is the huge weakness of religion. If Christians would actually read the Bibles, we'd have a lot fewer Christians. Sadly history has had too many people like this who are ok with genocide. He's probably a decent man who's just never thought this through openly and compassionately. He's in too deep. If only history had had fewer apologists and more humanists.
@in777sight Few have read it, especially not those who say they believe it. It's just a book, and there's no reason to trust what it says though. The main problem is that we still get pro-genocide apologists like this guy basing their position on the bibles.
No, lots of books describe wars and all sorts of things. Try to read around a bit and that will help you to understand. It's just a book, dont' take it too seriously.
This is an important topic and I'm grateful that Biola has allowed comments on this video. Another college's panel discussion of this same topic posted by one of the panel discussants, who is a brilliant and well-spoken gentleman, did not allow comments (for whatever reason and I have no accusations here). Ironically, a close friend of mine has comparable training to that gentleman-both are Bible scholars with their Ph.D.s from Harvard-but is much more plainly a theological conservative in his approach to topics such as this one. Theological positioning is both a product of one's training and one's own thinking as the result of that training in whatever environment one operates within; I myself was raised in a neo-orthodox/theologically liberal mainline church environment but moved to a thoroughly conservative position beginning in my college years due to various areas of Christian apologetics that were unanswerable except by the explanation that the Bible authors were indeed 'moved by the Holy Spirit' to write words that not only they chose (or quoted verbatim from God), but which were divinely superintended. That evidence takes the form of striking correct geophysical cosmogony in Genesis 1, strikingly correct sanitation and other medical practice in the Torah, hundreds of examples of strikingly fulfilled prophecy, including the timing of Messiah's coming. If I had to name just one published title that's a central hub for presenting and referencing such evidence, it would be EVIDENCE FOR FAITH/DECIDING THE GOD QUESTION, ed. by John Warwick Montgomery. Many ancillary publications are accessible in the various chapter footnotes of that particular work, including Robert C. Newman's THE EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. So that's the background I bring to the discussion of this topic, and indeed it is not merely an academic or side issue for me as I know of another brilliant scholar/author, who is also something of a personal acquaintance and personal friend online, for whom this topic is rather a stumbling block when it comes to his view of biblical veracity and authority. His professional training is in patristics, an area in which I have a merely marginal background, though the question of God and OT genocide itself lies outside of that specialization except of course where the church fathers themselves commented upon it. So this is a topic over which not only Christian laymen, but also Bible/theology scholars themselves, are divided. What I would like to suggest and offer here, at least for those professing Christians who accept at least SOME degree of biblical authority upon the premise that God inspired the Bible authors as they themselves claimed was true and as Jesus reportedly approached the scriptures Himself. For those who only accept the devotional or other 'usefulness' of scripture, but think that its historical and theological veracity and reliability is hopelessly wrong and has been long-since abandoned by anyone whose opinion about such things matters at all, I refer them back to the large body of published Christian apologetics evidences that undermines that perspective and leads to a contrary conclusion about the authority of scripture. For those who accept the authority/veracity of the Bible, at least in principle, there is more to work with here by way of discussion. Let me suggest that a place to start, proceeding from the premise that Bible is historically and theologically reliable and true, is with enlarging our contextual thinking about this topic (of God in the OT commanding genocide) to recall the nature and attributes of God: Eternal/Time-Transcendent Creator/Owner/Ruler of everything Omniscient Omnipotent Loving/merciful but also righteous Just, and so will not permit evil to continue unstopped and unjudged indefinitely The Apostle Paul's Potter/clay analogy Divinely-appointed civil law which is a reflection of God's loving/righteous character (e.g., the Ten Commandments) At the same time, let me remind my fellow Bible readers that the everyday context of our lives is that of human beings living in human society governed by laws, rules, regulations, ethics, and sensibilities that may or may not be based upon God's nature and attributes. Thus our thinking as Christians is dually conditioned by: What we know of God from the Bible What we culturally think is right, as discerned from societal standards we imbibe and from our personal sense of conscience These kinds of considerations alone will not detail a quick resolution of the question at hand-Did God command genocide in the Bible?-but I think they will provide the necessary, fuller context for approaching the question in a more fair and thoughtful way, and that in turn can lead to a better, more biblical, and more satisfying answer in the longer run. What I urge against here is drawing any hasty conclusion upon insufficient consideration of all the operant conditions that bear upon it; this is an area where people often do draw hasty, emotional, and even snide and flip conclusions, especially if they already have an axe to grind against the idea of God or against the notion that the Bible is bonafide revelation from Him. For example, an ant-Bible-as-divine-revelation quip I often hear is: 'The ancient Jewish priest class wrote the Bible to give themselves power over the people and to harness them to enlarge Israel's geopolitical influence and so of course God's' command to commit genocide is included and evil because it's merely a front for the power-tripping priest class.' Another consideration I would like to emphasize has several steps: 1. Double-checking the 'genocide' passage(s) itself for STATED REASONS why the prescribed action is to be taken (i.e., look for phraseology like "LEST YOU…") Such contextual clues are surely some of the most direct ethical information we have about the reason for God's commanded actions. 2. Reviewing those passages of scripture where the more generalized question 'Why should I accept God having a 'right' to do or command anything that to me seems unfair or unjust?' That question comes up more than once in scripture, and not only in the book of Romans, but by all means go back and re-read the extended passage in Romans too. 3. Make a side-by-side comparison of the best scriptural reasons vs. the best opposing 'societal sensibility' reasons. Sharpen the question as much as possible and make the contrast as vivid as possible. For example: Biblical perspective: Nothing a righteous God ever commands as Creator and Ruler is ever unrighteous or unfair, even the execution of capital criminals or the extermination of sufficiently corrupted societies. Judgment is coming for everyone anyway, and so 'earlier' judgment of individuals and even of whole societies that have become sufficiently corrupt, is sometimes warranted in this life. Judicial execution of criminal behavior upon God's direction is not murder, but is both punishment of evildoing and preservation of the welfare of others, and is therefore not murder, whether it be focused upon an individual or upon a mutually-agreed, corrupt community/nation. Societal perspective: By mutual agreement of humans,, only civil authority has the right to kill humans under prescribed circumstances (e.g., criminal behavior warranting capital punishment), but nations are never permitted to engage in the killing of entire communities/nations because we have historical examples of truly evil societies that did so. And surely not EVERYONE-i.e., children and even domesticated animals!-can be guilty or corrupted by the evil of their adult parents and neighbors. Also, claiming that 'God told us to wipe them all out' is an all-too-convenient claim for what I suppose to be merely power-tripping people to make; plus I don't believe in YOUR God or in YOUR religious book that God supposedly revealed, or that God gives new information/commands directly to the people YOU claim are His prophets anyway. Note that in the worldview juxtaposition I've created above there are truth-claims made that are either supported by, or undermined by, tangible evidence that is available and can be examined. These kinds of component questions need to be addressed as well: -Is Postmodernism 'legit? 'Are there 'separate truths' that are individualized, or is genuine truth absolute (true for all and regardless of who does/doesn't believe it)? -Does God actually exist and has God actually communicated His nature and moral will to us, or does God not exist and so only there is only human ethical consensus available to guide and self-govern us? How can we tell? -Is a particular religion only 'true' in the mind of its believer(s), or does it have objective validity? And how can we tell? -What are 'rights?' Does God have any 'rights?' If so, what are they? Why should humans not judge God instead of God judging humans? -Is the preservation of all human life at any cost and without regard to any consideration of morality/accountability the highest priority ethical good? Is the execution of criminals for capital crimes murder of the criminal? -What exactly is the difference between 'killing' and 'murder' of humans? Is there a difference? -What exactly is the difference between 'genocide' and 'justified (though regrettable) war'--? -Wasn't World War II a 'justified war' because it served at least in part to help STOP a horrific genocide? -Are humans responsible for our own behavior? Are we answerable to God or to other humans for any of our behavior? Is there any such thing as ultimate individual culpability? Is there any such thing as GROUP culpability?
The question really is does God have a right to murder?.. think about that.... so if God is Holy perfect and God is true love ..peefect Love ...and the God of all Justice ....of course He does.. God will murder the wicked..the child killers and molesters..the criminals who murder for financial gain..etc... in the end God will murder the wicked...
@in777sight maybe you're a little confused by what I said earlier about can God murder well God will destroy the wicked and God has directed his people to wipe out civilizations in the past so yes if God is perfect God is holy God is all-knowing god is perfect Justice sure he has a right to kill he's God he's not like us....... Now in terms of the kingdom of course Jesus said my kingdom is not of this world the kingdom of God does not come outside by observation but the kingdom of God is within you and when you receive Jesus as Messiah and savior of your life then God comes and dwells in you and so the kingdom of God comes alive inside of you the kingdom of God is in your heart the Bible says a Jew is one inwardly to to know God is to seek inside your own heart for God so that's where the kingdom of God is it's in your heart and it is all wrapped up in your relationship to the one true God through his only son Jesus Christ it's that simple you're right God's not about wars those wars are started by men God wants peace... But God uses Nations and leaders God is the one who sets up Kings and kingdoms in the Earth and so wars will take place but God is always four piece of course Jesus is called the Prince of Peace..not sure where you're going with all the son of Abraham stuff but I will say this that God's people are God's people because simply because God made a covenant with Abraham so Abraham in his blood descendants are the Jews and they are God's people and God cannot break his Covenant he will not break his Covenant and he's made an agreement with Israel in perfect as they are......does that mean God's going to save all his real well Paul says not all Israel is Israel so true Israel yes God will save all true Israel sons of God yes he will
The common law definition of "murder" is, " unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. " So, short answer is no. Since the law flows from God, God can't do anything unlawful. He can kill whoever he wants, but it's not murder. See, Deuteronomy 32:39.
Very understandable. One has to tread carefully when reading & interpreting the BIBLE. INTELEGENT is NOT unique to GOD. He was. is & will always be the CREATOR. We were, are & will always be the CREATION. HIS ways are NOT our ways & HIS thoughts are NOT our thoughts. GOD does as HE pleases.
@@jeffbezos3501 Yes . God tells us not to kill and yet he commands the murder of the Canaanites, men women children, and even their animals , every sheep Ox and donkey was killed . ( Joshua 6 ) What a twat !!! They are the actions of a psychopathic madman, maybe worse because a psycho wouldn't have bothered the animals.
So the fact that God said it was okay for you to be a slave and that your master can beat you as hard as he wants as long as you don’t die in two days. You’re okay with that? Because I’m not, I say that was morally reprehensible and wrong and if the Gods ways were actually moral he would have said slavery is WRONG
Hess approaches the conquest narratives like a young Earth creationist approaches Genesis, except in reverse.... "The text doesn't mean what it says! The text doesn't mean what it says!" The YEC says "The text means what it says! The text means what it says!" The real point of issue is whether God actually made the command of the human herem sacrifice as is clearly and repeatedly stated in the text. The issue is not how successfully it was carried out or, despite the lengths of hermeneutical gymnastics to claim, that it was only combatants involved. This tactic of saying things like, a City's not a city... A king's not a king... Men women and children doesn't actually mean men women and children is precisely what the young Earth crowd is doing... Looking for any possible interpretation, regardless of how implausible, that will Preserve inerrancy.
First, my comment does not require that I know ANE languages to discern Hess's words in English. He is telling you what he is doing. To repeatedly say that the meaning in Hebrew COULD possibly mean the thing he needs it to mean, doesn't make the application compelling or reasonably plausible, especially considering the numerous occurences of herem warfare in scripture. Also, to attempt to show that the result was not genocide is not to show that the scriptural author did not think the command from YHWH was. The issue is not result, but intent. Secondly, other scholars like Susan Niditch have written “deep in the mythological framework of Israelite thought, war, death, sacrifice, the [herem] ban, and divine satiation are integrally associated…. "To dissociate the Israelite ban from the realm of the sacred and from the concept of sacrifice is to ignore the obvious and yet this is precisely what many scholars have done. What leads them to ‘ignore the obvious’?” (War in the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993)" She rightly and in detailed fashion points out that herem in scripture and ANE history has the clear meaning of divinely commanded human sacrifice to appease the deity, an offering to God in exchange for some benefit, usually victory in battle. Several OT texts show this.
Connor, You shouldn't have to repeatedly go outside the context of phrase usage to look for instances which suit you that occur in another context. He had to do this with several words or phrases. Also, I don't think it works on other grounds, for we see Israel commanded to put people under the herem ban in several places. In Deut 2: 34 men, women and children are targeted. In Deut 7 the nations are placed under herem and even though it says they will do this "little by little" it is herem and they are to "show them no mercy". In Deut 20, as general war practice, if there is surrender, they are to become forced labor slaves. If they don't, Israel's to slaughter every male and keep women and children alive as booty! But for the nations of Canaan under the herem ban, it says leave nothing alive that breathes. In Num 21: the herem vow is offered in exchange for divine victory and "The Lord listened to the voice of Israel, and handed over the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their towns." Lev 27:29 explicitly and covenantally commands "No human beings who have been devoted to destruction (herem) can be ransomed; they shall be put to death." In 1 Sam 15, Saul is rebuked by Samuel because he did not fully complete the herem ban but saved the king and some livestock. Samuel says God told him to complete herem and loses his throne as a result. In Numbers 31, Moses if furious with Israel for bringing back women and children. He commands the slaughter of every male, even infants, and every non virgin female. So, considering the multitude of occasions with explicit references to the slaughter of innocent non combatants, it is disingenuous to look for alternate meanings of phrases in an attempt to stretch the meaning of a couple passages beyond recognition. Though I don't discount some of the details he highlights, it breaks down due to the numerous different occurrences that need to be minimized or explained away. Also, appealing to war rhetoric, exaggeration, hyperbole etc does not negate the moral implications involved. How does not killing 20,000 make the command to kill ANY a moral good? Any claim to moral realism would collapse into a defence of moral relativism. It's like someone saying that abortion can be a good on occasion. That is moral relativism. Now, I do not think God actually commanded these things as the writers have described. Most scholars know that the bulk of the stories are written/redacted centuries after the purported events for political and religious reasons. This is seen in the text itself, with the usage of much later Hebrew, names of not yet existing places/kings/people groups, and other anachronisms and details a contemporary author could not have known.
Actually you are approaching the text like a YEC because you ignore context and socio-cultural circumstances in exchange for a ridiculous Westernized reading. The overwhelming majority of scholarship is on Hess' side. No one is sugar-coating any text this is how the near east functioned. Go read some scholarship.
Four incompatible propositions Let's try to define the issue in a precise way. Consider the following propositions. 1. No historical case of genocide has ever been morally justified. Genocide is wrong, period. 2.The biblical writings give us completely accurate information about God. 3. They say that on certain occasions God ordered His people to practice genocide against their neighbors. 4. God is wholly good. You cannot consistently affirm all four of these propositions. If God is wholly good, He doesn't issue evil commands. If He commands unjustified genocide, His commands are evil. But proposition 3 is indisputable - the biblical writings do say that that God commanded genocide in certain situations. It follows that either 1 or 4 must be rejected. Either some cases of genocide are justified, or else the biblical writings do not always give us completely accurate information about God. The Bronze Age writers were pulling it all out of their arse as they went along; man made myths and fairy tales.
your problem was number 3, that exactly the topic in the video, so sorry but no ''genocide'' or anything similar. If you disagree then you are butchering the context of the OT and ANE rhetoric common in that day, and cherry picking. The rest of your reply shows how biased and uneducated you are on the subject
Believers of this nonsense have there apologists and theologians to put the right spin on it so that it can be morally palatable and still make some sort of sense albeit some very convoluted sensibility.
@@annoyingdude76 This is why I, as a Christian, am disgusted with "genocide apologists". The reason Hess, Copan and others employ "hyperbole" and "exaggeration" is to minimize the literal nature of the text. ANE war rhetoric is true but what is absurd is that this does nothing to remove the moral problem Segismundo2011 is trying to articulate above. Exaggeration and ANE hyperbole don't help because there is no moral difference between God commanding the slaughter of ONE infant from thousands. If something is objectively wrong then God cannot command it for any reason as he cannot act against his nature. I am not talking about God's right to take life, but God's ability to command men to do what is objectively immoral for him to do. Also, if one is willing to admit the non literal fulfillment of what is in the text due to hyperbole, why doesn't one follow the actual external archaeological and internal textual evidence that says almost none of this actually happened because scholars know these texts were written centuries after the purported events.
@@CanadianOrth if you look at their arguments they aren't saying that God ordered less people to be killed, rather that the order wasn't to literally kill everybody. And if you look at the text, context and external evidence, it's precisely that case. So yeah I agree God can't order even one infant death. Point is He didn't. So no reason to be disgusted, just read their material and read it carefully. As for the archaeology, it's not as though there is no evidence, the evidence that exists show a gradual takeover, not a quick extermination. You can't take it all as literal or all as figurative.
The bible is pretty clear on that and the overwhelming majority of theologians sees that genocide as being a command (which at least the author thinks) by god. The immorality lies in the command to commit genocide and not if they actually did it.
then you should study eastern war rhetoric more.The command was a hyperbolic statement meant to cause fear in the enemy(common in that time and also after),and if you really read the OT carefully you could have seen the problems of interpreting it as literal.The best way I could describe it today would be like saying that I ''kicked someone's a**'' in some sport,in other words I didn't literally kick him in the a**(see Matt Flannagan and Paul Copan for a summery)
annoyingdude76 You want to say all of the old testmaent is a metaphor? I am sorry but the command to murder disobedient children is an everlasting order of god and so is are all the other comands to slay murder and destroy. Surely one despises such immorality. to kill disobedient children. This is an immoral god.
TorianTammas don't straw man my argument and twist my words.I said indirect causes can't be objected to(especially by subjective morals of atheists).Orders can be objected to so you would have a good reason to say this,however you still fail big time.Firstly because those ''massacres'' are just eastern war hyperboles(do more research kid) and similarly with the law codes.Second you are oblivious to what rebelious ''children''(old male boys) were like to be threatened with that law(I suppose sons of belial is a foreign term for you).So go study history,ancient eastern societies,laws and most importantly context,before you shoot your atheistic myths against Christians
When whoever writes down in a book that killing your disobedient children is law, When kiling and murdering starts with drowning all living being but a handfull in a boat and continues with extinguishing the malacites and so commiting genocide not to mention to murder the innocent first born of egyt, it is not the question are these historical. It shows clearly that this god these people worshiped we a genocidal murderer at least in their imagination about him and this is what they worshiped. This is a tribal religion and everyone got killed who disobeyed these god. This is horrible for us in the 21 century and it is not surprising that one wishes to close eyes from the facts.
TorianTammas I see,still using a straw man.This is why there exists such a thing as theology,to explain away your hurling of the elephant.All that you put under the category of God's actions you can throw away,since He doesn't ''cause'' it(from the flood to the egyptian firstborn and so on),or do you care to explain just how did He do it?Ofcourse not,the only thing He did was warn them in advance(both the Egyptians and those pre-flood psychopaths).As for orders you fail there too,since you are oblivious the the term rebellious back then.Any rebellious or idolater was something you would call today a psychopath or an immoral person(I see the terms I mentioned before don't ring a bell,huh cherry picker?).If you had one of those rebellious ''kids''(grow men btw) you would have lost your head ages ago.So using today's mentality for a society back then is dumb at best.Did you know what the Izraelites did when they fell into idolatry?Ofcorse not,you don't know anything about the subject at hand.And repeating ''genocidal murderer'' like a broken record without any evidence to the counter claims of eastern hyperbolic language just show you can only make empty claims.Way to go Stailn,who needs textual analysis and context when you can just throw empty words,huh?Let's see you correct me once.Oh and btw,since you are an atheist,you can't object to anything moraly.Go study
@@stuartwest8836 Tell me please, did u also ask for evidence when they were brainwashing u with the Adam&Eve story? Or, did u just believe them because they showed u a primitive book that claims itself to be the holy truth? Your inconsistency in requiring levels of evidence is a hypocrisy that u are oblivious to due to your emotional attachment to the religious beliefs that were indoctrinated in you without the benefit of intellect.
@John Carboni LOL. You live in a fantasy land believing the fairy tales, superstitions, and invisible beings the religion scam has made up for the gullible fools, yet you think I am ignoring reality?? LOL
what about Numbers 31 where God commanded that they were all killed but the Israelites brought back the women and the young boys. Moses was angry and told them to kill the women who were not virgins and kill the little boys and take the young girls for yourselves.
God for Christian make tsunami earthquake , epidemic problem and you don't think that is cruel you don't have another live. Do you have physical problem????!
quick answer is no GOD did not he only decided to give th eorder to exterminte all the baby killers who were ding human sacrifice amongst other abominations .he was defending his creation and protecting humanity. however we did not listen
Dr. Hess, at 45:16 ff you assert the Hittite war records are far more accurate than the Egyptian war records. Can you direct me to some English translations of Hittite texts which you believe are exaggerating a war victory less than the other pagans?
Barry Jones - Can we stop calling high civilization and their religions pagan. 10.000 goddesses and gods with different religions can not be subsumed in such a way.
Why would there be complete destruction of certain tribes to the point of everything that breathes if not for some kind of genetic contamination or similar to completely stop it in its tracks?
If God is the master of life and death (and that seems part of His job description) what difference does it really make HOW he brings about the death of creatures, since eventually He kills them all? If he sends a plague, or a famine or drought, or decrees death by the sword, he is simply going about his normal business. Men, women and children die all the time, constantly, universally, in all sorts of ways. The real issue is suffering and death itself, not the aesthetics of how it's done. "Genocide" is a concept invented in the 1940's. Like so many of the other phantoms of contemporary egalitarian liberalism -- "racism", "sexism", "xenophobia", "speciesism", etc.-- it ideologically pre-judges as both 1) evil and 2) incorrect a wide variety of beliefs, attitudes and actions which both the biblical God and most of the human race have, until the last ten minutes, considered part of the complex and normal messiness of history. Once you accept this modern structure of discourse and its groundless assumptions, as if these words describe something real, you will always lose to it. Is the biblical God "racist" and "sexist"? Pointless questions, since both these ten-minute-old ideas are based on illusions. Like "genocide" they are all a modern version of the pre-modern "witchcraft". Wake up.
you are wrong: "god" gave military commands to kill children.... it was not a volcano, it was not a tornado, it was not a famine.... it was A MILITARY COMMAND. are you a nazi?
If how you die doesn't matter, since all die then consider whether you'd rather die of old age or be brutally murdered. I think the answer is obvious to sane people. So next time think a little deeper before you comment. If entire ecosystems are crippled and threatened by irresponsible land management and pollution, thinking people would agree that this is unjust. If the ecosystem has death within it as part of a natural order of the ecosystem's functionality. There is no exploiting or injustice involved in th latter. Please, try thinking logically before you comment . Challenge your own ideas and at least see if they can stand up some type of scrutiny.
And now, a lesson on how to justify genocide.
There is a lot of other evidence against the genocide allegation, too. One book that covers this is Paul Copan's Is God a Moral Monster? I'm not sure if all of Copan's analysis is correct, but it does have a lot of useful points.
Brilliant book
Paul Copan constantly accuses God of accommodating wickedness, saying that things God protected were not “ideal” (aka were wicked) but that was ok because at least it was better than what would have been if God didn’t regulate it at all (aka God caves to man’s wickedness). I strongly disagree with Copans approach.
My channel is dedicated to confronting so called tough Bible passages without sacrificing Gods holiness. Right now I am covering concubines and wives, but eventually will get to a war and violence series, and show God is just and right through all this.
This video is a example of beating around the bush.
The question presented was, did God order the killing? It’s an easy yes or no question but yet this individual takes a full hour to blow smoke up everybody’s behind.
Did you even watch any of the video lol, he explained it in detail
If the question is, "Did God command Joshua and Israel to commit genocide?", it's intellectually dishonest to change the topic and start talking about whether they actually did it. He can't bring himself to say, "Yes, He did", so he has to say that the text doesn't mean what it says. He's got nothing.
Right AND EXACTLY 💯 WHY WE'RE STILL PLAGUED RIPPED OFF AND MORE THAN HARRASSED BY THE DEMONIC DEVIL'S COCKTAILS PLOYS PLOTS AND SCHEMES OF SATAN'S OWN TO DATE BECAUSE HE KEPT AND SOLD LIVESTOCK AND LET THE"" ONE PREGNANT WITCH THAT WAS ZEZEBELS INCLEAN WOMAN WITH OUR ENEMY PEOPLE TODAY THAT GOD DOES HATE AND THEY HATE US HIS OWN GENUINE ELETE AND ELECT KINGDOM CITIZENS RIGHTFUL HIERS OF JESUS CHRIST LAMB OF GOD'S THRONE AND NONE OF THESE NOT LESS THAN NEW EGYPT ARGUING OVER WHO'S WHO AND WANT ISLAM ROMAN EMPIRE CATHOLIC CHURCH PAPACY RULE GLOBALLY AND ARE THE IMPOSTERS MEANT TO CHEAT YOU PERIOD IT IS WRITTEN! THIS GUYS MURKY WATERED IMPOSTOR NO AUTHORITY FROM WHICH HE'S SPEAKING 🗣️ NUTZ
IT'S NOT NEGOTIABLE GOD'S THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER YES BETTER BELIEVE HE'S TAKING IT ALL BACK TO HIMSELF BECAUSE HE ALONE IS GOD!! THE FACT" THAT STILL PRICKS MAN'S MANKIND NO GENDER PRIDE SO THEY CONTINUE TO COMPETE HARASY RUSHING AHEAD FOR A MERE PROFIT AND CARING NOTHING FOR GOD'S TRUE SHEEP 🐑 JESUS OF NAZERETH COVERING LAND ALREADY SPOKEN FOR HER NAME IS ISRAEL
@@pamelabrigham5605 God's gonna do what God's gonna do. See Job 9:12.
@@robanddawnramcharan6408 Si when you kill, you are doing the right thing! Got It!
Did you even watch any of the video
The most incredibly inept and sad attempt at the justification of the unjustifiable.
I find it so interesting how people think they would do a much better job at being God.
@@Taco-jitsu
God can command Moses to stone homosexuals, or those who collected sticks on Sabbath. He can let the Israelites to keep the virgins for themselves after the family and the whole town had been wiped out. He can send people to hell, no matter he is a good person or not, if he doesn't believe in Jesus. He can let kids have cancer. or people be chained throughout their lives, only to mercilessly be killed in the end. He can let animals being eaten alive by other animals.
You can justify this. You can reconcile this.
You know what, God is love. He is never wrong, and who are we to question His wisdom? We are His creation.
It's just imposibble for us to understand His knowledge.
Unjustified...how? Do you understand the nature of who God is?
@@Taco-jitsu Do you think people shouldn't vote because you can't have an opinion unless you can do the job?
@@ashistoxic8447 We're never absolutely certain about anything that's what makes us atheists. But our best guess is your God / Gods (Holy Trinity) is a bit of a dick
Not only did Yahweh command them to commit genocide, he also punished any of their leaders who showed mercy on the peoples he deemed enemies.
God never commanded the Israelites to commit genocide.
A truly educational lecture. Thank you Dr. Hess! What about in chapters 12 to the end of Joshua? Is there any evidence for the same line of thinking that genocide did not occur?
I found this very unsatisfying. I'm guessing whoever titled the video either didn't listen to it first or was fine clickbaiting. Hess himself clearly isn't interested so much in the Command from God but what was carried out or done by the Israelites irrespective of whether this fulfilled God's own indictment. He says as much at 35:53.
The problem is this virtually doesn't matter in terms of the critique. If God commanded and Joshua failed to fully obey then that can easily just mean Joshua is incompetent at genocide rather than at all indicating Yahweh wasn't calling for such. The reason people struggle with this, myself included, is what it says about God, not what it says about humanity which I already know is flawed and capable of evil.
This apologist strategy seems to be arguing that the number of babies that were slaughtered could have been a small number.... in which case, it wasn't really that evil
He's also a PhD scholar. Something you're not
@@paradisecityX0 He is an aphologist that defend a dogma, that's less than zero
@@christopherjimenez5537 He's an apologist that relays biblical scholarship and hermeneutics. You're an anti-intellectual naysayer similar to a young earth creationist in response to an apologist defending evolution. THAT's less than zero
Are you pro choice or prolife? Many athiests believe it is ok to slay millions of fetuses because it's on their own terms. When it comes to a christian we believe that every child is precious, but in certain cases it would have been merciful before Christ to send them to heaven to live an immortal life before they could be tainted by sin. Current day this method doesn't apply because of Christ's ultimate sacrifice. Everyone now has a chance no matter where or who you come from. So in a Christians mind we believe that God has specific and righteous reasons for doing so and also because he has the authority as our all knowing creator and heavenly father. You often hear mothers saying that, "I brought them in this world, ill take them out." Why do we not question this motherly authority on a child unborn and born, but with God it's monstrous?
@@carlyrios8297 so well said! 👏
how religion turn a man into a pshycopath
You are a psychopath
So the masses of women and children where not in the forts ...so therefore no innocent women and children were destroyed......right ....that’s the ticket ....
Correct.
It would be great to see what he's looking at - power point slideshows, etc.
Thanks.
its been 9 years, has anyone found the slides?
power point slides PLEASE thanks :)
It's available for download from our Open Biola site (open.biola.edu). Search for the talk, and then download it under the "Media Options" tab directly below the video.
To the people saying, God is evil, you done bumped your head. If God is real, you never die you were born immortal you just change locations and if God wishes to change you from where he put you; too bad he’s God and guess what? You’re going to get your wish one day you will not have to hear about God ever ever ever again.
YES HE DID , they are the words in the bible. Im sick of listening to excuses and interpretations .
Crazy. The problem with this is that it tries to present God’s orders as some thought out legal document where you can pick over the words and define exactly what was meant. The command to kill every man, woman and child is a statement filled with emotion. Man, woman, child; man-to-woman. Meh! Spot the difference.
Unleash fury!!! That’s what was meant, let’s not kid ourselves. Thank God, or whoever, they didn’t have nukes, because then it would simply read “nuke ‘em”
Even if it did mean to kill every infant, all infants go to heaven anyways, God is good.
@@krayziejerry You, my friend, are simply terrifying
@@maddi62Actuallly no, there's a thing called context which athiest never know about in The Bible.
@@krayziejerry Nowhere but amongst twisted jihadi islamists is life so worthless. You religious people are truly terrifying
@@maddi62 Do you read all literatures by only choosing certain parts to prove your point also?
First you have to demonstrate scientifically that any God really exist.
I love this. I mean yeah the discussion is all about "if they (God) exist are they a monster" but feels silly since they probably don't
Big Bang
He has made more sense than anyone else whose tried to explain this to me, Plus God himself, explained some things as I listened.
I am sadden to think that this is a professor. at a Christian University. For those who want to know the meaning of Joshua read John Cassian. Remember that Joshua starts by saying it is a book of the law that if you meditate on it you will have good success. So how do these stories lead us to a successful life? Cassian tell of visiting holy men in Egypt who told him that the story of Joshua is about overcoming the 7 deadly faults. Killing babies relates to not allowing even baby faults to enter our lives It goes along with the idea that the Kingdom of God is within us and that we do not wrestle against flesh and blood but against principalities and powers within our lives that need to be overcome. Pride, dejection, gluttony are the faults that I know that I have to fight against. To meditate on Joshua is to understand that there are ways and weapons we can use to overcome our faults. It makes you want to reread Joshua and realize that the clues to overcoming our faults are found in "this book of the Law".
Always fun to watch guys trying to justify organized mass murder.
"The word thousand doesn't need to be translated as thousand." Okay... what more do you want to conveniently interpret to fit your dogma, haha.
Because that's not how it should be read. You do know exaggeration in military terms is normal in warfare 3000 years ago? That the 1000 is an exaggeration.
Great presentation and as it should be. It reminds me of constitutions writings, for example the fact that it says that every man is equal, then thieves are equal to righteous... I mean then this is one interpretation, isn't it?... So what he explains simply has a deeper meaning than straight taking the writings. This is reading between the lines as they said.
I believe that there is no flaw in God's character nor the Bible, but I gotta admit, I don't like this method of defending the Bible.
I've seen it with a couple other theologians discussing the Exodus: picking apart the tiniest of nuances to try to say, "It's really not as bad as it seems." I'm sure much of what this speaker says is historically accurate and thoroughly reviewed, but it just doesn't look good. Rather, the real question that must be answered is this: "Did God have a moral right to command Israel to attack and displace the Canaanites?"
The main issue that every theologian seems to be missing is that many atheists--the people using the Exodus to attack God's character--do not believe in objective right and wrong. Their sense of morality is subjective and ever-shifting, leading to the creation of concepts like cultural relativism (which, at it's most literal, could defend cruel behaviors as long as they're part of a culture) and even the universal declaration of human rights (a document defining what powerful Westerners think should be right and wrong). I'm certainly not saying these two examples are useless and should be thrown out, but they are far from perfect ideas, compared to the perfect moral code that the Old Testament and Christ define.
At the end of the day, if you do not believe the Lord has the right to punish peoples who are committing great evils for generations as part of their culture, it will be hard to come to terms with the Israelites' invasion. But if you recognize that certain things--normalized child sacrifice, adultery, sexual immortality--are wrong and deserving of punishment, you will find it hard not to agree with the Lord's command, even when it seems harsh.
I'm definitely still thinking over this issue, but this is the best answer I've got.
You are experiencing something called cognitive dissonance. Your humanity, reason and empathy recognize these Biblical teachings as evil. But you were raised from a young age to believe the Bible is God’s word and God is good. I hope your quest leads you to freedom and inner peace.
Its ok for jashua
And forbidden for muhammed
That is christian mind😂😂😂
Your prophet was a filthy pedofile, he was addicted to sex and cheated on his wife with a slave girl.
Did Jesus have hot sisters....or cousins?
Cherem against the demonized giant tribes
Excellent. Thank you.
Why is so much of the audio cut out?
Humanism is a laughable concept. It is based on the fundamental principle of the value of the individual whose intrinsic worth comes from being specially created, is apart from the rest of the animal kingdom , embodied in Imago Dei.
Tell Putin, Mao, Stalin, Caesar, Alexander the Great, any Chinese emperor, any tribal chief that you are as valuable as they are, and see how far that gets you.
Darwin said we are just animals.
When you swim in the sea of Western Enlightenment, you make irrational assumptions about other seas.
Why do we have nuclear weapons?
Simple: one side favors Imago Dei.
Great video. Thank you!
10:10 all cities did
Would you say the same about Jerusalem in 70 AD ?
"... das heißt, zu Hitler fiel ihnen was ein. Und zum Teil ungeheuer interessante Dinge, nicht? Ganz fantastisch interessante und komplizierte und hoch über dem gewöhnlichen Niveu schwebende Dinge.
Das habe ich als grotesk empfunden."
-- Hannah Arendt im Gespräch mit Günter Gaus, 1964
Joshua 6:21 They utterly destroyed everything in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox and sheep and donkey, with the edge of the sword. Joshua 8:25-26 All who fell that day, both men and women, were 12,000-all the people of Ai. For Joshua did not withdraw his hand with which he stretched out the javelin until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai.Joshua 10:8 The LORD said to Joshua, “Do not fear them, for I have given them into your hands; not one of them shall stand before you.” Joshua 10:28 Now Joshua captured Makkedah on that day, and struck it and its king with the edge of the sword; he utterly destroyed it and every person who was in it. He left no survivor. Thus he did to the king of Makkedah just as he had done to the king of Jericho. Read the rest of Chapter 10 where Israel moves from city to city laying waste to all of its inhabitants. If this is not genocide someone has a problem reading. This speaker wastes so much time trying to explain a city that he is blind to see how many were destroyed in Jericho. This man is telling lies and trying to cover up what happened here through his explanations. He is also a member of a Bible translation and likewise did not translate Genesis correctly and put in a biased version of what he wanted it to mean.
ruclips.net/video/z4fv8apO3_4/видео.html
Are you a Phd in Near Eastern Languages and History?
Problem with reading the Bible comes from Theological stubbornness to interpret the clear words in to some intellectual philosophies in order to justify the horrors that speak volumes against benevolence of Loving God. The other problem with the Bible ist fact, most of the religious people never read the Bible... And finally, Christians still believe OT God is their God, when in reality YAHWE is not even the God of all Jewish people.... It concerns only the lineage of Isaac, who will later become Israelites. The rest of the Abraham's family doesn't count. As a matter of a fact, the commands "Kill them all"
@@maron8824 where do you find these facts that you made up?
@@rena6895 I like many scholars find it plain in old testament. Problem you have is either you don't read Bible or you refuse to acknowledge what you read. You se this theological way of interpreting Bible is atrocity. Bible is no subject to philosophy. It a Book that speaks about some particular history and some very clear laws. There is a section that is is literally called the book of the law! 613 laws, nothing about them is left unclear. You know every student of our law as we have it right now, has to learn Roman Law. It's a huge book full of laws. Bible is no different, you don't go around and make theologically philosophical questions about Roman Law. Do you understand? Bible is not there for you to interpret stuff as you like it. Bible is clear. No all what is left is for you to figure out are you still religious after you understood what Bible is telling you, can you follow?
Fort fort fort ....must be a fort ...so everyone deserved destruction and were not children hahahahaha hahahahahaha hahahahahaha
10:00 but how are they compared to other Bronze Age cities ?
1 Samuel 15:3 go and strike Amalek and completely destroy everything that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey...
God commands the killing of children and BABIES!?!?
This whole thing is a convoluted bs apologetic missing the point, misleading and downright misinterpretation bc the fact of the text is repugnant to modern sensibilities (and rightfully so). Be Christian if you will, but stop dodging the hard pressed tenets of your faith.
Thank you...but i think the point of view is about God rights. So people many talk about human rights, but how about God rights? So i agree what Prof. Richards said about "kharem". But the important question is why Kanaan People is can't refend?
They can. But then they become Israelites or at least resident strangers.
So sad that even now we have people, indoctrinated as children, who will defend genocide. This is the damage religion does. Morality is the huge weakness of religion. If Christians would actually read the Bibles, we'd have a lot fewer Christians. Sadly history has had too many people like this who are ok with genocide. He's probably a decent man who's just never thought this through openly and compassionately. He's in too deep. If only history had had fewer apologists and more humanists.
Hi see you blindly dismissing a sophisticated academic based on a dogmatism. And attacking his motives without actually giving an argument.
@@pleaseenteraname1103That's a great defence when anyone dares to disagree, eh? Yet you can't address my points.
Well, ok, we have a challenger. Why is genocide ok then? See if you can succeed instead.
@@Ozzyman200 because you didn’t make any points all you did was attempt to psychoanalyze his motives.
@@pleaseenteraname1103 Yes I did. Read it again.
Here's that question you dodged again:
"Why is genocide ok then?"
0/1
@@Ozzyman200 When did I ever say it was?
Interesting how apparently sane persons can tie themselves in knots trying to rationalize bronze-age morality because it comes as part and parcel of their system of superstitious beliefs. Whatever happened to "turn the other cheek"? If God can't make up His mind, how can we?
Liked & faved :o)
So sad that even now we have people, indoctrinated as children, who will defend genocide. This is the damage religion does. Morality is the huge weakness of religion. If Christians would actually read the Bibles, we'd have a lot fewer Christians. Sadly history has had too many people like this who are ok with genocide. He's probably a decent man who's just never thought this through openly and compassionately. He's in too deep. If only history had had fewer apologists and more humanists.
@in777sight Sadly we just can't get Christians to read it so they don't know how evil it is.
@in777sight Few have read it, especially not those who say they believe it. It's just a book, and there's no reason to trust what it says though. The main problem is that we still get pro-genocide apologists like this guy basing their position on the bibles.
No, lots of books describe wars and all sorts of things. Try to read around a bit and that will help you to understand. It's just a book, dont' take it too seriously.
@in777sight There are lots of books describing far bigger wars though. Do you also take them seriously?
@in777sight No, there are wars far far bigger than that in many books. Look into it.
This is an important topic and I'm grateful that Biola has allowed comments on this video. Another college's panel discussion of this same topic posted by one of the panel discussants, who is a brilliant and well-spoken gentleman, did not allow comments (for whatever reason and I have no accusations here). Ironically, a close friend of mine has comparable training to that gentleman-both are Bible scholars with their Ph.D.s from Harvard-but is much more plainly a theological conservative in his approach to topics such as this one. Theological positioning is both a product of one's training and one's own thinking as the result of that training in whatever environment one operates within; I myself was raised in a neo-orthodox/theologically liberal mainline church environment but moved to a thoroughly conservative position beginning in my college years due to various areas of Christian apologetics that were unanswerable except by the explanation that the Bible authors were indeed 'moved by the Holy Spirit' to write words that not only they chose (or quoted verbatim from God), but which were divinely superintended. That evidence takes the form of striking correct geophysical cosmogony in Genesis 1, strikingly correct sanitation and other medical practice in the Torah, hundreds of examples of strikingly fulfilled prophecy, including the timing of Messiah's coming. If I had to name just one published title that's a central hub for presenting and referencing such evidence, it would be EVIDENCE FOR FAITH/DECIDING THE GOD QUESTION, ed. by John Warwick Montgomery. Many ancillary publications are accessible in the various chapter footnotes of that particular work, including Robert C. Newman's THE EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY.
So that's the background I bring to the discussion of this topic, and indeed it is not merely an academic or side issue for me as I know of another brilliant scholar/author, who is also something of a personal acquaintance and personal friend online, for whom this topic is rather a stumbling block when it comes to his view of biblical veracity and authority. His professional training is in patristics, an area in which I have a merely marginal background, though the question of God and OT genocide itself lies outside of that specialization except of course where the church fathers themselves commented upon it. So this is a topic over which not only Christian laymen, but also Bible/theology scholars themselves, are divided.
What I would like to suggest and offer here, at least for those professing Christians who accept at least SOME degree of biblical authority upon the premise that God inspired the Bible authors as they themselves claimed was true and as Jesus reportedly approached the scriptures Himself. For those who only accept the devotional or other 'usefulness' of scripture, but think that its historical and theological veracity and reliability is hopelessly wrong and has been long-since abandoned by anyone whose opinion about such things matters at all, I refer them back to the large body of published Christian apologetics evidences that undermines that perspective and leads to a contrary conclusion about the authority of scripture. For those who accept the authority/veracity of the Bible, at least in principle, there is more to work with here by way of discussion.
Let me suggest that a place to start, proceeding from the premise that Bible is historically and theologically reliable and true, is with enlarging our contextual thinking about this topic (of God in the OT commanding genocide) to recall the nature and attributes of God:
Eternal/Time-Transcendent
Creator/Owner/Ruler of everything
Omniscient
Omnipotent
Loving/merciful but also righteous
Just, and so will not permit evil to continue unstopped and unjudged indefinitely
The Apostle Paul's Potter/clay analogy
Divinely-appointed civil law which is a reflection of God's loving/righteous character (e.g., the Ten Commandments)
At the same time, let me remind my fellow Bible readers that the everyday context of our lives is that of human beings living in human society governed by laws, rules, regulations, ethics, and sensibilities that may or may not be based upon God's nature and attributes. Thus our thinking as Christians is dually conditioned by:
What we know of God from the Bible
What we culturally think is right, as discerned from societal standards we imbibe and from our personal sense of conscience
These kinds of considerations alone will not detail a quick resolution of the question at hand-Did God command genocide in the Bible?-but I think they will provide the necessary, fuller context for approaching the question in a more fair and thoughtful way, and that in turn can lead to a better, more biblical, and more satisfying answer in the longer run. What I urge against here is drawing any hasty conclusion upon insufficient consideration of all the operant conditions that bear upon it; this is an area where people often do draw hasty, emotional, and even snide and flip conclusions, especially if they already have an axe to grind against the idea of God or against the notion that the Bible is bonafide revelation from Him. For example, an ant-Bible-as-divine-revelation quip I often hear is: 'The ancient Jewish priest class wrote the Bible to give themselves power over the people and to harness them to enlarge Israel's geopolitical influence and so of course God's' command to commit genocide is included and evil because it's merely a front for the power-tripping priest class.'
Another consideration I would like to emphasize has several steps:
1. Double-checking the 'genocide' passage(s) itself for STATED REASONS why the prescribed action is to be taken (i.e., look for phraseology like "LEST YOU…") Such contextual clues are surely some of the most direct ethical information we have about the reason for God's commanded actions.
2. Reviewing those passages of scripture where the more generalized question 'Why should I accept God having a 'right' to do or command anything that to me seems unfair or unjust?' That question comes up more than once in scripture, and not only in the book of Romans, but by all means go back and re-read the extended passage in Romans too.
3. Make a side-by-side comparison of the best scriptural reasons vs. the best opposing 'societal sensibility' reasons. Sharpen the question as much as possible and make the contrast as vivid as possible. For example:
Biblical perspective: Nothing a righteous God ever commands as Creator and Ruler is ever unrighteous or unfair, even the execution of capital criminals or the extermination of sufficiently corrupted societies. Judgment is coming for everyone anyway, and so 'earlier' judgment of individuals and even of whole societies that have become sufficiently corrupt, is sometimes warranted in this life. Judicial execution of criminal behavior upon God's direction is not murder, but is both punishment of evildoing and preservation of the welfare of others, and is therefore not murder, whether it be focused upon an individual or upon a mutually-agreed, corrupt community/nation.
Societal perspective: By mutual agreement of humans,, only civil authority has the right to kill humans under prescribed circumstances (e.g., criminal behavior warranting capital punishment), but nations are never permitted to engage in the killing of entire communities/nations because we have historical examples of truly evil societies that did so. And surely not EVERYONE-i.e., children and even domesticated animals!-can be guilty or corrupted by the evil of their adult parents and neighbors. Also, claiming that 'God told us to wipe them all out' is an all-too-convenient claim for what I suppose to be merely power-tripping people to make; plus I don't believe in YOUR God or in YOUR religious book that God supposedly revealed, or that God gives new information/commands directly to the people YOU claim are His prophets anyway.
Note that in the worldview juxtaposition I've created above there are truth-claims made that are either supported by, or undermined by, tangible evidence that is available and can be examined. These kinds of component questions need to be addressed as well:
-Is Postmodernism 'legit? 'Are there 'separate truths' that are individualized, or is genuine truth absolute (true for all and regardless of who does/doesn't believe it)?
-Does God actually exist and has God actually communicated His nature and moral will to us, or does God not exist and so only there is only human ethical consensus available to guide and self-govern us? How can we tell?
-Is a particular religion only 'true' in the mind of its believer(s), or does it have objective validity? And how can we tell?
-What are 'rights?' Does God have any 'rights?' If so, what are they? Why should humans not judge God instead of God judging humans?
-Is the preservation of all human life at any cost and without regard to any consideration of morality/accountability the highest priority ethical good? Is the execution of criminals for capital crimes murder of the criminal?
-What exactly is the difference between 'killing' and 'murder' of humans? Is there a difference?
-What exactly is the difference between 'genocide' and 'justified (though regrettable) war'--?
-Wasn't World War II a 'justified war' because it served at least in part to help STOP a horrific genocide?
-Are humans responsible for our own behavior? Are we answerable to God or to other humans for any of our behavior? Is there any such thing as ultimate individual culpability? Is there any such thing as GROUP culpability?
The question really is does God have a right to murder?.. think about that.... so if God is Holy perfect and God is true love ..peefect Love ...and the God of all Justice ....of course He does.. God will murder the wicked..the child killers and molesters..the criminals who murder for financial gain..etc... in the end God will murder the wicked...
@in777sight and God destroys the wicked...and Satan is bound for a 1000 years... According to the Bible
@in777sight maybe you're a little confused by what I said earlier about can God murder well God will destroy the wicked and God has directed his people to wipe out civilizations in the past so yes if God is perfect God is holy God is all-knowing god is perfect Justice sure he has a right to kill he's God he's not like us....... Now in terms of the kingdom of course Jesus said my kingdom is not of this world the kingdom of God does not come outside by observation but the kingdom of God is within you and when you receive Jesus as Messiah and savior of your life then God comes and dwells in you and so the kingdom of God comes alive inside of you the kingdom of God is in your heart the Bible says a Jew is one inwardly to to know God is to seek inside your own heart for God so that's where the kingdom of God is it's in your heart and it is all wrapped up in your relationship to the one true God through his only son Jesus Christ it's that simple you're right God's not about wars those wars are started by men God wants peace... But God uses Nations and leaders God is the one who sets up Kings and kingdoms in the Earth and so wars will take place but God is always four piece of course Jesus is called the Prince of Peace..not sure where you're going with all the son of Abraham stuff but I will say this that God's people are God's people because simply because God made a covenant with Abraham so Abraham in his blood descendants are the Jews and they are God's people and God cannot break his Covenant he will not break his Covenant and he's made an agreement with Israel in perfect as they are......does that mean God's going to save all his real well Paul says not all Israel is Israel so true Israel yes God will save all true Israel sons of God yes he will
@@johnbear6145 amen brother 🙏🇿🇦
The common law definition of "murder" is, " unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. " So, short answer is no. Since the law flows from God, God can't do anything unlawful. He can kill whoever he wants, but it's not murder. See, Deuteronomy 32:39.
@@robanddawnramcharan6408 yes correct killing is a better word
Evangelical profs have to walk on eggshells when discussing the Old Testament’s historiography😳😂
Would be nice to see the PowerPoint.
Very understandable. One has to tread carefully when reading & interpreting the BIBLE. INTELEGENT is NOT unique to GOD. He was. is & will always be the CREATOR. We were, are & will always be the CREATION. HIS ways are NOT our ways & HIS thoughts are NOT our thoughts. GOD does as HE pleases.
Yeah god does as he pleases, God is a twat !!!
@@mikeoxlong2144 you’re governed by people who tell you what to do lol but god is the twat
@@jeffbezos3501 Yes . God tells us not to kill and yet he commands the murder of the Canaanites, men women children, and even their animals , every sheep Ox and donkey was killed . ( Joshua 6 ) What a twat !!!
They are the actions of a psychopathic madman, maybe worse because a psycho wouldn't have bothered the animals.
So the fact that God said it was okay for you to be a slave and that your master can beat you as hard as he wants as long as you don’t die in two days. You’re okay with that? Because I’m not, I say that was morally reprehensible and wrong and if the Gods ways were actually moral he would have said slavery is WRONG
I think the clause of "from men to women" it's hyperbolic style.
yeahh... better think that than think your god commands killing women and babies.
16:20 - Phone ringing was very funny
Hess approaches the conquest narratives like a young Earth creationist approaches Genesis, except in reverse....
"The text doesn't mean what it says! The text doesn't mean what it says!"
The YEC says "The text means what it says! The text means what it says!"
The real point of issue is whether God actually made the command of the human herem sacrifice as is clearly and repeatedly stated in the text. The issue is not how successfully it was carried out or, despite the lengths of hermeneutical gymnastics to claim, that it was only combatants involved.
This tactic of saying things like, a City's not a city... A king's not a king... Men women and children doesn't actually mean men women and children is precisely what the young Earth crowd is doing...
Looking for any possible interpretation, regardless of how implausible, that will Preserve inerrancy.
First, my comment does not require that I know ANE languages to discern Hess's words in English. He is telling you what he is doing. To repeatedly say that the meaning in Hebrew COULD possibly mean the thing he needs it to mean, doesn't make the application compelling or reasonably plausible, especially considering the numerous occurences of herem warfare in scripture. Also, to attempt to show that the result was not genocide is not to show that the scriptural author did not think the command from YHWH was. The issue is not result, but intent.
Secondly, other scholars like Susan Niditch have written “deep in the mythological framework of Israelite thought, war, death, sacrifice, the [herem] ban, and divine satiation are integrally associated…. "To dissociate the Israelite ban from the realm of the sacred and from the concept of sacrifice is to ignore the obvious and yet this is precisely what many scholars have done. What leads them to ‘ignore the obvious’?” (War in the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993)"
She rightly and in detailed fashion points out that herem in scripture and ANE history has the clear meaning of divinely commanded human sacrifice to appease the deity, an offering to God in exchange for some benefit, usually victory in battle. Several OT texts show this.
Connor,
You shouldn't have to repeatedly go outside the context of phrase usage to look for instances which suit you that occur in another context. He had to do this with several words or phrases. Also, I don't think it works on other grounds, for we see Israel commanded to put people under the herem ban in several places.
In Deut 2: 34 men, women and children are targeted.
In Deut 7 the nations are placed under herem and even though it says they will do this "little by little" it is herem and they are to "show them no mercy".
In Deut 20, as general war practice, if there is surrender, they are to become forced labor slaves. If they don't, Israel's to slaughter every male and keep women and children alive as booty! But for the nations of Canaan under the herem ban, it says leave nothing alive that breathes.
In Num 21: the herem vow is offered in exchange for divine victory and "The Lord listened to the voice of Israel, and handed over the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their towns."
Lev 27:29 explicitly and covenantally commands "No human beings who have been devoted to destruction (herem) can be ransomed; they shall be put to death."
In 1 Sam 15, Saul is rebuked by Samuel because he did not fully complete the herem ban but saved the king and some livestock. Samuel says God told him to complete herem and loses his throne as a result.
In Numbers 31, Moses if furious with Israel for bringing back women and children. He commands the slaughter of every male, even infants, and every non virgin female.
So, considering the multitude of occasions with explicit references to the slaughter of innocent non combatants, it is disingenuous to look for alternate meanings of phrases in an attempt to stretch the meaning of a couple passages beyond recognition. Though I don't discount some of the details he highlights, it breaks down due to the numerous different occurrences that need to be minimized or explained away.
Also, appealing to war rhetoric, exaggeration, hyperbole etc does not negate the moral implications involved. How does not killing 20,000 make the command to kill ANY a moral good? Any claim to moral realism would collapse into a defence of moral relativism. It's like someone saying that abortion can be a good on occasion. That is moral relativism.
Now, I do not think God actually commanded these things as the writers have described. Most scholars know that the bulk of the stories are written/redacted centuries after the purported events for political and religious reasons. This is seen in the text itself, with the usage of much later Hebrew, names of not yet existing places/kings/people groups, and other anachronisms and details a contemporary author could not have known.
Actually you are approaching the text like a YEC because you ignore context and socio-cultural circumstances in exchange for a ridiculous Westernized reading. The overwhelming majority of scholarship is on Hess' side. No one is sugar-coating any text this is how the near east functioned. Go read some scholarship.
Fundy atheist and fundy YEC Christians have a lot in common when it comes to Genesis.
Four incompatible propositions
Let's try to define the issue in a precise way. Consider the following propositions.
1. No historical case of genocide has ever been morally justified. Genocide is wrong, period.
2.The biblical writings give us completely accurate information about God.
3. They say that on certain occasions God ordered His people to practice genocide against their neighbors.
4. God is wholly good.
You cannot consistently affirm all four of these propositions. If God is wholly good, He doesn't issue evil commands. If He commands unjustified genocide, His commands are evil. But proposition 3 is indisputable - the biblical writings do say that that God commanded genocide in certain situations. It follows that either 1 or 4 must be rejected. Either some cases of genocide are justified, or else the biblical writings do not always give us completely accurate information about God. The Bronze Age writers were pulling it all out of their arse as they went along; man made myths and fairy tales.
your problem was number 3, that exactly the topic in the video, so sorry but no ''genocide'' or anything similar. If you disagree then you are butchering the context of the OT and ANE rhetoric common in that day, and cherry picking. The rest of your reply shows how biased and uneducated you are on the subject
Believers of this nonsense have there apologists and theologians to put the right spin on it so that it can be morally palatable and still make some sort of sense albeit some very convoluted sensibility.
@@annoyingdude76 This is why I, as a Christian, am disgusted with "genocide apologists". The reason Hess, Copan and others employ "hyperbole" and "exaggeration" is to minimize the literal nature of the text. ANE war rhetoric is true but what is absurd is that this does nothing to remove the moral problem Segismundo2011 is trying to articulate above. Exaggeration and ANE hyperbole don't help because there is no moral difference between God commanding the slaughter of ONE infant from thousands. If something is objectively wrong then God cannot command it for any reason as he cannot act against his nature. I am not talking about God's right to take life, but God's ability to command men to do what is objectively immoral for him to do.
Also, if one is willing to admit the non literal fulfillment of what is in the text due to hyperbole, why doesn't one follow the actual external archaeological and internal textual evidence that says almost none of this actually happened because scholars know these texts were written centuries after the purported events.
@@CanadianOrth if you look at their arguments they aren't saying that God ordered less people to be killed, rather that the order wasn't to literally kill everybody. And if you look at the text, context and external evidence, it's precisely that case. So yeah I agree God can't order even one infant death. Point is He didn't. So no reason to be disgusted, just read their material and read it carefully. As for the archaeology, it's not as though there is no evidence, the evidence that exists show a gradual takeover, not a quick extermination. You can't take it all as literal or all as figurative.
Can't hear the questions, they should have been repeated for the video viewers.
The bible is pretty clear on that and the overwhelming majority of theologians sees that genocide as being a command (which at least the author thinks) by god. The immorality lies in the command to commit genocide and not if they actually did it.
then you should study eastern war rhetoric more.The command was a hyperbolic statement meant to cause fear in the enemy(common in that time and also after),and if you really read the OT carefully you could have seen the problems of interpreting it as literal.The best way I could describe it today would be like saying that I ''kicked someone's a**'' in some sport,in other words I didn't literally kick him in the a**(see Matt Flannagan and Paul Copan for a summery)
annoyingdude76
You want to say all of the old testmaent is a metaphor? I am sorry but the command to murder disobedient children is an everlasting order of god and so is are all the other comands to slay murder and destroy. Surely one despises such immorality. to kill disobedient children. This is an immoral god.
TorianTammas don't straw man my argument and twist my words.I said indirect causes can't be objected to(especially by subjective morals of atheists).Orders can be objected to so you would have a good reason to say this,however you still fail big time.Firstly because those ''massacres'' are just eastern war hyperboles(do more research kid) and similarly with the law codes.Second you are oblivious to what rebelious ''children''(old male boys) were like to be threatened with that law(I suppose sons of belial is a foreign term for you).So go study history,ancient eastern societies,laws and most importantly context,before you shoot your atheistic myths against Christians
When whoever writes down in a book that killing your disobedient children is law, When kiling and murdering starts with drowning all living being but a handfull in a boat and continues with extinguishing the malacites and so commiting genocide not to mention to murder the innocent first born of egyt, it is not the question are these historical. It shows clearly that this god these people worshiped we a genocidal murderer at least in their imagination about him and this is what they worshiped. This is a tribal religion and everyone got killed who disobeyed these god. This is horrible for us in the 21 century and it is not surprising that one wishes to close eyes from the facts.
TorianTammas I see,still using a straw man.This is why there exists such a thing as theology,to explain away your hurling of the elephant.All that you put under the category of God's actions you can throw away,since He doesn't ''cause'' it(from the flood to the egyptian firstborn and so on),or do you care to explain just how did He do it?Ofcourse not,the only thing He did was warn them in advance(both the Egyptians and those pre-flood psychopaths).As for orders you fail there too,since you are oblivious the the term rebellious back then.Any rebellious or idolater was something you would call today a psychopath or an immoral person(I see the terms I mentioned before don't ring a bell,huh cherry picker?).If you had one of those rebellious ''kids''(grow men btw) you would have lost your head ages ago.So using today's mentality for a society back then is dumb at best.Did you know what the Izraelites did when they fell into idolatry?Ofcorse not,you don't know anything about the subject at hand.And repeating ''genocidal murderer'' like a broken record without any evidence to the counter claims of eastern hyperbolic language just show you can only make empty claims.Way to go Stailn,who needs textual analysis and context when you can just throw empty words,huh?Let's see you correct me once.Oh and btw,since you are an atheist,you can't object to anything moraly.Go study
Evolution made man and man made God. Religion has got the fools by the balls.
Wow you're so right on, so free, so wise......you must write a book so we can all catch up.........
@@stuartwest8836
Evolution made man and man made God. Religion has got you by the balls.
@@AtamMardes Perhaps you can show me where I can see one transitional species in the fossil record......just one......
@@stuartwest8836 Tell me please, did u also ask for evidence when they were brainwashing u with the Adam&Eve story? Or, did u just believe them because they showed u a primitive book that claims itself to be the holy truth? Your inconsistency in requiring levels of evidence is a hypocrisy that u are oblivious to due to your emotional attachment to the religious beliefs that were indoctrinated in you without the benefit of intellect.
@John Carboni
LOL. You live in a fantasy land believing the fairy tales, superstitions, and invisible beings the religion scam has made up for the gullible fools, yet you think I am ignoring reality?? LOL
Jeremiah 51: 20..25
they all had Corona...i mean satans seed or plague. nephalim. kinda like the vampires of the day. now i understand.
Daz Davis is a coward who blocks those he fears. Run little boy run
what about Numbers 31 where God commanded that they were all killed but the Israelites brought back the women and the young boys. Moses was angry and told them to kill the women who were not virgins and kill the little boys and take the young girls for yourselves.
The word used in that section for ‘children’ is not the normal Hebrew word for children.
Jews are OK .. some of them
God for Christian make tsunami earthquake , epidemic problem and you don't think that is cruel you don't have another live. Do you have physical problem????!
Please, not even chickens were allowed to live. Genocide is genocide, and it wasn't just Jericho.
quick answer is no GOD did not he only decided to give th eorder to exterminte all the baby killers who were ding human sacrifice amongst other abominations .he was defending his creation and protecting humanity. however we did not listen
Dr. Hess, at 45:16 ff you assert the Hittite war records are far more accurate than the Egyptian war records. Can you direct me to some English translations of Hittite texts which you believe are exaggerating a war victory less than the other pagans?
Barry Jones - Can we stop calling high civilization and their religions pagan. 10.000 goddesses and gods with different religions can not be subsumed in such a way.
Trust GOD
Need to read King James Bible and see A-I is 2 syllable word
Why would there be complete destruction of certain tribes to the point of everything that breathes if not for some kind of genetic contamination or similar to completely stop it in its tracks?
If God is the master of life and death (and that seems part of His job description) what difference does it really make HOW he brings about the death of creatures, since eventually He kills them all? If he sends a plague, or a famine or drought, or decrees death by the sword, he is simply going about his normal business. Men, women and children die all the time, constantly, universally, in all sorts of ways. The real issue is suffering and death itself, not the aesthetics of how it's done.
"Genocide" is a concept invented in the 1940's. Like so many of the other phantoms of contemporary egalitarian liberalism -- "racism", "sexism", "xenophobia", "speciesism", etc.-- it ideologically pre-judges as both 1) evil and 2) incorrect a wide variety of beliefs, attitudes and actions which both the biblical God and most of the human race have, until the last ten minutes, considered part of the complex and normal messiness of history. Once you accept this modern structure of discourse and its groundless assumptions, as if these words describe something real, you will always lose to it. Is the biblical God "racist" and "sexist"? Pointless questions, since both these ten-minute-old ideas are based on illusions. Like "genocide" they are all a modern version of the pre-modern "witchcraft". Wake up.
+Stephen Manning I agree, your statement cuts to the chase. Insightful
you are wrong: "god" gave military commands to kill children.... it was not a volcano, it was not a tornado, it was not a famine.... it was A MILITARY COMMAND.
are you a nazi?
If how you die doesn't matter, since all die then consider whether you'd rather die of old age or be brutally murdered. I think the answer is obvious to sane people. So next time think a little deeper before you comment.
If entire ecosystems are crippled and threatened by irresponsible land management and pollution, thinking people would agree that this is unjust. If the ecosystem has death within it as part of a natural order of the ecosystem's functionality. There is no exploiting or injustice involved in th latter. Please, try thinking logically before you comment . Challenge your own ideas and at least see if they can stand up some type of scrutiny.
So that makes it a ok....
I didn't even know this was a question until now. Who reads that into the text?
Anyone who can read?
My interest wained when you used the ridiculous niv to support your position......apparently you have no knowledge of Translation issues......
Name one NIV issue that affects this particular topic (says a ESV aficionado).
@@EdSuastegui 64,000 words missing against NIV