J
juliamajor
Guest
means both
- Status
J
juliamajor
Guest
See post#12 . Baal also means’owner & “master”
N
NotWorthy
Guest
J
juliamajor
Guest
Actually not correcting but simply adding information-
J
juliamajor
Guest
did /you read my original post?#12? All info related to this question are listed therein-thanks
N
Nita
Guest
Hi juliamajor,
From the Book of Joshua (presume that is what you mean by the Joshua Conquest):
Joshua 15:63 But the Jebusites, the inhabigtants of Jerusalem, the people of Judah could not drive out; so the Jebusites dwell with the people of Judah at Jerusalem to this day.
Joshua 16:10 However they did not drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer: so the Canaanites have dwelt in the midst of Ephraim to this day but have become slaves to do forced labor.
Joshua 17:12-13 Yet the sons of Manasseh could not take possession of those cities; but the Canaanites persisted in dwelling in that land. But when the people of Israel grew strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor, and did not utterly drive them out.
Have read your post #12, which seems to indicate a conflict between the two books (Joshua and Judges) regarding the elimination of the pagan tribes. In light of the above passages, how does Joshua conflict (or not gel) with Judges?
Nita
From the Book of Joshua (presume that is what you mean by the Joshua Conquest):
Joshua 15:63 But the Jebusites, the inhabigtants of Jerusalem, the people of Judah could not drive out; so the Jebusites dwell with the people of Judah at Jerusalem to this day.
Joshua 16:10 However they did not drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer: so the Canaanites have dwelt in the midst of Ephraim to this day but have become slaves to do forced labor.
Joshua 17:12-13 Yet the sons of Manasseh could not take possession of those cities; but the Canaanites persisted in dwelling in that land. But when the people of Israel grew strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor, and did not utterly drive them out.
Have read your post #12, which seems to indicate a conflict between the two books (Joshua and Judges) regarding the elimination of the pagan tribes. In light of the above passages, how does Joshua conflict (or not gel) with Judges?
Nita
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
Inerrency IMO does not mean literally true. Today we do not as a whole believe that Genesis is an accurate rendition of how the earth came to be. I don’t want to get bogged down in another fundamentalist exercise in literalism, but JPII did say that the bible was not a science or history text. The fact that many examples of seemingly factual accounts of history is in it is of no matter. Some writers were better historians than others.Julia
Thank you for a very thought provoking reply!I’m glad I’m not the only one who’s confused! And, as Alice in Wonderland says, ‘It becomes curiouser and curiouser’.
The examples you quote lead to the question of inerrancy. Providentissumus Deus, Divino Afflante Spiritu and Dei Verbum are quite definite on Biblican inerrancy but I don’t know how to square their statements with the sort of examples you quote. And, of course, the Bible has quite a number of them.
A number of things have to be taken into account. One is the real desire to make the Israelites not the bad guys. This may have resulted in the writer’s desire to make God the heavy here. Another is that there was, as some have pointed out, quite important theological lessons that were being conveyed. These truths outweigh to some extent the need for actual historical accuracy. I would never opt for a ready that made God the orderer of such mahem. I rather suspect that as most people do, there was an attempt to explain away a rather horrifying act. The fact that in doing so, the writer was able to teach an important truth to his listeners is all to the better.
We continue to have a discussion on exactly what inerrency means. Surely it does not mean absolute literalism, since the Church makes quite clear her basic agreement with evolution and other things that are at odds with literalistic interpretations. What I have always understood it to mean is that as to matters that are important to our theological wellbeing, the Holy Spirit has guided each writer to “draw the correct” conclusion, if not the correct factual background.
J
juliamajor
Guest
The evidence backing Book Of Joshua version of the conquest is light indeed.The mass extermination and eliminations of whole cities and peoples do not exist.Judges has a much different story of some battles, yes, but not the seemingly endless warfare stated in Joshua.More of it is in the nature of assimilation into the territory- especially the highlands. Also the the native population of Canaanites enslavement in enormous amounts is not attested to in Judges, Samuels or Kings.
K
kepha1
Guest
God has the right to kill people, either directly or indirectly. God is the Author of Life and when it’s our turn to die, it will be up to Him whether it be directly or indirectly.
God judges those who do evil (as if we humans would never stoop so low to do such things by making laws, having police, judges and jails). How dare God judge evil!
The reason why God told the Israelites to wipe out entire populations was because they were burning their own children as sacrifices. Yes, God shows tough love sometimes, because he is a loving Father, not a toting grandfather made in our image. He doesn’t want such people around any more than we do. How long will God stay His wrath over the millions of aborted babies that are offered up on the altars to the god of Self?
“The cemetery of the victims of human cruelty in our century is extended to include yet another vast cemetery, that of the unborn.” Pope John Paul II
God judges those who do evil (as if we humans would never stoop so low to do such things by making laws, having police, judges and jails). How dare God judge evil!
The reason why God told the Israelites to wipe out entire populations was because they were burning their own children as sacrifices. Yes, God shows tough love sometimes, because he is a loving Father, not a toting grandfather made in our image. He doesn’t want such people around any more than we do. How long will God stay His wrath over the millions of aborted babies that are offered up on the altars to the god of Self?
“The cemetery of the victims of human cruelty in our century is extended to include yet another vast cemetery, that of the unborn.” Pope John Paul II
F
Frankk
Guest
I think most people would agree with this. However, it does leave some interesting problems. If asked how people know Mary was a virgin, they will say something like ‘Because it says so in the Bible’. Similarly, with such things as the resurrection and that God created the heaven and the earth - because it says so in the Bible - there is no other evidence that can be called on. These are nothin more or less than literal interpretations. But all would scoff at the idea that the sun actually stood still or time reversed for Hezekiah - because science tells us it’s impossible.
But if these ideas are ludicrous, how much more ludicrous is it to believe Gen 1?
Bearing in mind, of course, that science also tells us that a virgin giving birth is impossible as is resurrection after death. It seems to me this ‘selectivity’ is difficult to resolve.
As written, the genocide question is not a matter of simile, metaphor, phenomenological language or hyperbole. They are written as fact [and inspired by the Holy Spirit] as, I guess, the static sun is.
Or maybe not!?
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Judges is meant to show a different story than Joshua. In Joshua, all the Israelites are united and when together, they can defeat any foe.
In Judges, which takes place over a period of 200 years, if I’m correct, the tribes have settled into their territories, and often have fallen into the idolatry which God had predicted if they didn’t eradicate all their foes.
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Truth was taught in stages.
The fulfillment of the old testament was Jesus, and He taught us to love our enemies. Clearly the treatment of the Canaanites is not compatible with Christ’s teaching to love our enemies.
Before we could be taught to love our enemies, people had to be taught to love ourselves and our own nation, and before we could do that, we had to be taught that God loves us. God chose the Israelites as His people and demonstrated to the world that God loves and cares for his people, through the Israelites.
Also consider that in the kill-or-be-killed world of 1200BC, a landless people wandering around in the desert had few options to survive. They had escaped slavery and had been stuck in the desert for 40 years relying on God to send manna. They needed a place to settle down and live or they could simply die. And no country was just going to let them in without a fight.
The fulfillment of the old testament was Jesus, and He taught us to love our enemies. Clearly the treatment of the Canaanites is not compatible with Christ’s teaching to love our enemies.
Before we could be taught to love our enemies, people had to be taught to love ourselves and our own nation, and before we could do that, we had to be taught that God loves us. God chose the Israelites as His people and demonstrated to the world that God loves and cares for his people, through the Israelites.
Also consider that in the kill-or-be-killed world of 1200BC, a landless people wandering around in the desert had few options to survive. They had escaped slavery and had been stuck in the desert for 40 years relying on God to send manna. They needed a place to settle down and live or they could simply die. And no country was just going to let them in without a fight.
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
You raise important points. I tend to view it this way: On matters that generally don’t happen such as resurrections and virgin births, I am more than willing to concede that God can intervene and cause such extraordinary things to happen in a single instance. On matters where the factual evidence is otherwise, I’m inclined to think of the bible as being more metaphor and teaching a moral than literal truth. Does this make sense? The story alluded to, responds to neither. Of course i agree that God could have ordered this, I simply don’t find that the God I have come to know and see no reason to lay such a vicious act at his doorstep. I rather believe the Israelites found benefit in removing the responsibility from themselves as well as conveying important lessons to others that God was not someone to trifle with. It was far better to be obedient. Such is always important to a fledgling people attempting to make it in a dangerous world.I think most people would agree with this. However, it does leave some interesting problems. If asked how people know Mary was a virgin, they will say something like ‘Because it says so in the Bible’. Similarly, with such things as the resurrection and that God created the heaven and the earth - because it says so in the Bible - there is no other evidence that can be called on. These are nothin more or less than literal interpretations. But all would scoff at the idea that the sun actually stood still or time reversed for Hezekiah - because science tells us it’s impossible.
But if these ideas are ludicrous, how much more ludicrous is it to believe Gen 1?
Bearing in mind, of course, that science also tells us that a virgin giving birth is impossible as is resurrection after death. It seems to me this ‘selectivity’ is difficult to resolve.
As written, the genocide question is not a matter of simile, metaphor, phenomenological language or hyperbole. They are written as fact [and inspired by the Holy Spirit] as, I guess, the static sun is.
Or maybe not!?
N
nemmark
Guest
One may find God’s actions and judgment on the Canaanites unjust and blatantly evil, but if one is to think clearly about the subject, they may find that this was a very reasonable and just way of dealing with His people. For instance, God literally had the option of letting the Jews wander around the desert rather than settling down, but this doesn’t fit in with His plan of salvation, because they had to become a nation that the Romans would later rule over. Also, God could have let the Israelites mingle with the Canaanites, but this would have totally dissected His people’s will from His. Furthermore, God could have chosen a different place for His people to settle, but they might have not fallen under Roman rule, and thus Jesus would not have been crucified by the Romans. Also, finding a totally uninhabited place in the region, or one inhabited by non-pagans, was extremely unlikely at the time. Next, God was further uniting mankind with Himself through this act by ensuring that His people would not be led astray, and thus He was doing good, because unity with God, who is goodness itself, is what good is. In addition, man-kind was generally ignorant of God’s laws, and the nature of God, so Israel needed to firmly root itself and develop as a unique nation with its own identity so that the truth would survive and be passed down from generation to generation within their society. Keep in mind that Israel was getting to know God, and hadn’t nearly the same means of being in communion (sacraments) with God and learning about God as we do today. This brings us back to the idea of the Israelites mingling with the Canaanites, which would weaken their identity and affiliation with the complete truth and eventually nullify it. One must also take into consideration if those who were killed were sentenced to eternity in Hell. It is true that they were wicked, but how much to their own fault? Also, we will never know if all of the Canaanites were truly evil to their own fault. One can’t argue that they were all worthy of Hell, and thus sent to Hell because God ordered their death, because God had ordered war and exile on many nations, including Israel, when all people clearly hadn’t willfully and knowledgably chosen separation from God. The main thing to keep in mind is that if God hadn’t demanded His people to settle and drive out and kill any impure peoples within the lands that they settled in, then there is a chance that Judaism may have not developed, and the truth may have been mixed with many fallacies. We can see this happening later on in the history of Israel, and God remedies this with purification through war and exile. The argument of God being evil is, to my knowledge, completely unreasonable, and is based off of the premise that God has done evil because he has ordered the immediate death of individuals through some sort of genocide. The truth is that God ordered what had to be done in order to ensure the establishment of Judaism and eventually the redemption of mankind. It was not some cruel illogical favoring of Israel, but rather an act of providence that would ensure our redemption and the knowledge of the untainted truth about God, good and evil, and natural laws. It is good to have sympathy for the Canaanites, and it is natural to question God’s objectives, but it is unreasonable to claim that God had contradicted his own good nature by unfairly favoring the Israelites and killing the Canaanites. I hope this helped! It’s hard to reason things out when we feel so confused and disturbed about things.
C
Cormacnl
Guest
God, according to the story, did not kill the Canaanites directly. His chosen people said they had been directed by him to do so.
Is this an acceptable excuse any group can use to justify destroying a rival group?
We are told the Canaanites had despicable beliefs that caused them to do terrible things. Okay, but were they alone in this? And don’t we also have to be careful when accepting what could be propaganda of the winning side?
Just a thought.
Is this an acceptable excuse any group can use to justify destroying a rival group?
We are told the Canaanites had despicable beliefs that caused them to do terrible things. Okay, but were they alone in this? And don’t we also have to be careful when accepting what could be propaganda of the winning side?
Just a thought.
F
fred_conty
Guest
In CAF it seems that the question of this type keeps surfacing again and again looking for some type of satisfactory answer.
I have seen some good answers but not absolutely convincing. We want something that will satisfy the heart as well as the mind. I haven’t seen it yet.
But my faith and love is in Jesus Christ, not in tragedy or catastrophic events. Those we will always have in one form or another. I don’t think we will every arrive at an acceptable rational explaination. This is the reason that God has revealed to us his truths to that we will attain our end, both God’s glory and ours. And the answer Jesus gives to us is that in the end we will overcome all obstacles to perfect happiness following Him in faith, hope, and charity. The greatest fear He said we should have is for someone to suffer the loss of his soul. But this question does have the effect of tearing at some people’s souls.
The answer is Jesus Christ. He, a Jew, was the first catholic, the head of his church. He accepted the Old Testament and quoted from it. And he asked us to trust that old testiment salvation message plan and to trust in him. Some answers are reserved for eternity where we will see the whole picture of his providence and the wisdom of his ways.
Just a thought.
I have seen some good answers but not absolutely convincing. We want something that will satisfy the heart as well as the mind. I haven’t seen it yet.
But my faith and love is in Jesus Christ, not in tragedy or catastrophic events. Those we will always have in one form or another. I don’t think we will every arrive at an acceptable rational explaination. This is the reason that God has revealed to us his truths to that we will attain our end, both God’s glory and ours. And the answer Jesus gives to us is that in the end we will overcome all obstacles to perfect happiness following Him in faith, hope, and charity. The greatest fear He said we should have is for someone to suffer the loss of his soul. But this question does have the effect of tearing at some people’s souls.
The answer is Jesus Christ. He, a Jew, was the first catholic, the head of his church. He accepted the Old Testament and quoted from it. And he asked us to trust that old testiment salvation message plan and to trust in him. Some answers are reserved for eternity where we will see the whole picture of his providence and the wisdom of his ways.
Just a thought.
S
sw85
Guest
All life belongs to God. He can do with it whatever He wills.
Moreover, the genocide of the Canaanites was punishment for their worship of demons, and was intended to protect the Israelites from contamination by demon-worship.
O
onemangang
Guest
I will try to provide an option (e)
God has revealed Himself to all men, and all men are held in account per Romans 1 and 2
**Each know of Him by Creation, Conscience, and justice. **
**Each will be judged in accordance to what they have done with the revelation they received by His grace. **
Romans 1:17 For the justice of God is revealed therein, from faith unto faith, as it is written: The just man liveth by faith. [18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice: [19] Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. [20] For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen,** being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable**.
You can see how the wicked Canaanites will be judged in Romans 1
[21] Because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified him as God, or given thanks; but became vain in their thoughts, and their foolish heart was darkened. [22] For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. [23]** And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things. **[24] Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. [25] **Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen
**
[31] Foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. [32] Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.
I can only assume that each and every Canaanite was not this way, rather more like those in Romans 2
(God) [6] Who will render to every man according to his works. [7] To them indeed, who according to patience in good work, seek glory and honour and incorruption, eternal life:
[10]** But glory, and honour, and peace to every one that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. [11] For there is no respect of persons with God.**
[13] For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but **the doers of the law shall be justified. **[14] For when **the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves: [15] Who shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them, and their thoughts between themselves accusing, or also defending one another,
[16] In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.**
Because the lives of ALL the Canaanite people was cut short in this world, doesn’t necessarily mean all are in hell.
It is my Personal view that God showed his Justice and Mercy within them.
Had the wicked Canaanite been able to continue in this world, perhaps they could have negatively influenced those that were doing good in accordance to the revelation they received.
That would enabled the wicked to build up greater wrath, but God in His mercy, put an end to it. The good Canaanites perhaps would have grown wicked by the influence of the wicked, so it was God’s mercy that stopped that from happening.
As said in 1 Corinthians A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
So it was God’s mercy was shown to both the “wicked” and the “good”
I think it is important to point out the message behind the action, be radicle when cutting sin out of your life!
The wicked would go to Sheol, and the good, to Abraham’s bosom, awaiting the Messiah who would come and preach to the spirits in prison!
On that note lets explore option e
e) God showed His mercy on the just and the wicked Canaanites by sacrificing their lives in this world for the sake of the next.
Peace and Love in Christ
C
Cormacnl
Guest
You have no problem with using religion to justify genocide?
S
sw85
Guest
Please don’t presume to speak to me if you’re going to misrepresent what I write.
“All life belongs to God. He can do with it what He wills.”
i.e., life is God’s, not man’s. Therefore God alone can dispose of it as he sees fit, not man.
If God tells you to commit genocide, you are morally obligated to commit genocide.
Nothing short of direct, personal divine revelation can join such a command with the force of moral obligation.
- Status