- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
27 Sep 15
2 edits
Originally posted by FMF
Who wrote this down and what was the purpose of writing it down?
The implication of the question is that an Israelite writer by definition COULD NOT be telling the unbiased truth.
I don't think that has to follow.
And I don't think many of the things written by writers of the Hebrew Bible will bear out that pro-Israel biased made it impossible for them to be objective.
27 Sep 15
Originally posted by sonshipDid the Canaanites have Mosaic Law or some equivalent?The implication of the question is that an Israelite writer by definition COULD NOT be telling the unbiased truth.
I don't think that has to follow.
And I don't think many of the things written by writers of the Hebrew Bible will bear out that pro-Israel biased made it impossible for them to be objective.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
27 Sep 15
4 edits
Originally posted by FMFDid the Canaanites have Mosaic Law or some equivalent?
Did the Canaanites have Mosaic Law or some equivalent?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No not Moses' law but something. I don't think they had the law from Mt. Sinai.
However, the Bible says that the work of the law is written in the conscience of men's heart even though they are Gentiles.
" For when Gentiles, who have no law, do by nature the things of the law, these, though they have no law, are a law to themselves.
Who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness with it and their reasonings, one with the other, accusing or even excusing them. ... In the day when God judges the secrets of men according to my gospel through Jesus Christ." (Rom. 2:14-16)
The work of the law it is written in the conscience of the hearts of human beings. And there were wise men, Gentile prophets, and ethical sages to speak truth to the consciences of men and women in many things.
I think during that 400 years plus the extra 40 their consciences was provoked one way or another that they were doing evil.
So when we see things like the Code of Hammurabi or the principles of Confucius or other ethical inventions of the Gentiles, we should understand that some amount of God's truth is embodied therein.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
27 Sep 15
5 edits
Originally posted by FMFSeveral passages like this indicate the Canaanites evil doing.
What makes you say the Canaanites were "doing evil"?
"Then Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them, I am Jehovah your God.
You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, in which you dwelt; and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you, nor shall you walk in their statutes.
You shall observe My ordinances and you shall keep My statutes to walk in them; I am Jehovah your God." (Lev. 18:1-3)
What follows are an enumeration of incest, homosexual, and beastial [sex between humans and animals] practices, and generally offenses which reveal a greedy lack of self control in sexual matters.
This is only representative of other passages similar to it which would concern other moral offenses.
Child sacrifice is also mentioned:
"And you shall not give any of your offspring to pass through the fire to Molech, and so profane the name of your God; I am Jehovah. " (v.21)
Chapter 18 is not an exhaustive list but a representative list. And we have to take note of what happened to Israel when they did fall into the very same sins. They suffered the very same expulsion from the land eventually,
"Do not defile yourselves in any of these things, for all these things the nations which I am casting out before you have defiled themselves.
Because the land has become defiled, I visited its iniquity upon it, and the land vomited out its inhabitants." (vs. 25,26)
We notice that God wanted to first disperse and cast out the sinful nations, disrupting their centers of idolatry and sinfulness. The hardest of the hard refuse to be dispersed and were slaughtered.
Reading a book like Lamentations written by the prophet Jeremiah indicates the impartiality of God. Self aggrandizing national propaganda would rather have probably withheld or concealed this history.
The Hebrew prophetic writer records it quite candidly as we see in the closing words of about imperialism of Babylon used to punish Israel at the end of Second Kings.
" Because Manasseh the king of Judah as done these abominations and has done MORE EVIL than all that the Amorites did, who were before him, and has caused Judah also to sin with his idols;
Therefore thus says Jehovah the God of Israel, I am now bringing such evil upon Jerusalem and Judah that both ears of everyone who hears of it will tingle.
And over Jerusalem I will stretch the line of Samaria and the plummet of the house of Ahab, and I will wipe Jerusalem as one wipes a pan, wiping it and turning it upside down.
And I will forsake the remnant of My inheritance and deliver them into the hand of their enemies, and they will become plunder and spoil to all their enemies. " (2 Kings 21:11-14)
Did you notice that? The Hebrews will ALSO become plunder and spoil to THEIR enemies. Can we say that this was the Divine "What Goes Around Comes Around" ? And that even to God's own theocratic nation.
And why?
"Because they have done what is evil in My sight and have provoked Me to anger since the day their fathers came forth out of Egypt even to this day." (v.15)
Now, I expect you maybe to mention something about shell fish and sea food. Go ahead. Let's have it from Leviticus.
27 Sep 15
Originally posted by sonshipBut all this is drawn from the literature that the perpetrators of the genocide themselves generated.
Several passages like this indicate the Canaanites evil doing.
[quote] [b] "Then Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them, I am Jehovah your God.
You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, in which you dwelt; and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you, nor shall you wa ...[text shortened]... ention something about shell fish and sea food. Go ahead. Let's have it from [b] Leviticus. [/b]
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by FMFBut all this is drawn from the literature that the perpetrators of the genocide themselves generated.
But all this is drawn from the literature that the perpetrators of the genocide themselves generated.
-----------------------------------------------------
The "perpetrators" as you say, were disobedient and at first would not go up to invade Canaan. They were disciplined and wandered for 40 more years in the wilderness.
I have to take into account, their reluctance rather then their eagerness to execute God's just judgment.
And the "perpetrators" include the prophetic books of Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel among other minor prophets. A case could conceivably be made that the ENEMIES of Israel penned these books to rationalize the calamaties brought upon this so-called "chosen people".
I have to take this into account also.
Along the way too many potentially embarrassing details of the history of Israel confirm that the honest truth was being written.
For example down in the very roots of the forming of the nation with Jacob and his twelve sons and one daughter. Genesis tells of how Jacob's sons Simeon and Levi avenged themselves against the rape of their sister Dinah.
They tricked the men of the offending society to all circumcise themselves and promise to become united with them in the proto Judaistic covenant. While the poor men were tender from the act of all circumcising themselves, the two brothers attacked.
Defenseless, they slaughtered in the most inhumane and underhanded way the vulnerable men, men who had trusted Jacob's family to an agreement to live in peace with them.
Jacob said that the cowardly deed made his name and the name of the Hebrews stink to the people of the land.
The awfulness of this history is told with such candor that I one has to adopt the historical method of noticing embarrassing details suggesting truthfulness.
Much of the history of the kings is similar. IE. the national hero king David's murder to steal a man's wife or Solomon's idolatry and excessive number of wives.
The "Look Whose Writing Though" explanation is not that strong a ground to doubt the accounts.
27 Sep 15
Originally posted by sonshipYou simply saying that you think the reason to doubt the accounts is "not that strong" is not evidence of anything other than what your personal opinion happens to be. It does not surmount the academic and intellectual problem that the only account of what the Canaanites were "guilty" of - and that warranted them being subjected to genocide - is drawn from the literature that the writings of the people who committed the genocide.
The "Look Whose Writing Though" explanation is not that strong a ground to doubt the accounts.
Are you ever frustrated by the fact your religion/ideology has given you such weak and abysmally subjective "evidence" to substantiate an important element in the mythology you subscribe to?
There were people in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s who were demonized and then subjected to genocide. Thank goodness there is historical evidence that allows us to weigh up what happened and reject the declarations of the victims' "guilt" and the subsequent punitive actions of the perpetrators of that genocide.
27 Sep 15
Originally posted by sonshipHistorical method? While repeating stories from an ancient folklore and then pronouncing them to be "true" ~ because you personally see no reasonable reason to doubt them ~ arguably is a "method" on your part, it's merely a rhetorical "method".
The awfulness of this history is told with such candor that I one has to adopt the historical method of noticing embarrassing details suggesting truthfulness.
I can't see how it can really be credibly described as "historical method" especially when we are weighing the justification for one people slaughtering another people, taking their land, and claiming that their God figure told them to do it.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by FMFYou simply saying that you think the reason to doubt the accounts is "not that strong" is not evidence of anything other than what your personal opinion happens to be. It does not surmount the academic and intellectual problem that the only account of what the Canaanites were "guilty" of - and that warranted them being subjected to genocide - is drawn from the literature that the writings of the people who committed the genocide.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I could could use your own degree of skepticism and count anything you might say as biased towards antitheism.
I could say "Who is writing this criticism? FMF? Oh, therefore it has to be anti-theistic. And an accusatory analysis against the God of the Bible could be the only possible outcome of his opinion. "
In the full scope of the Bible there is quite a spectrum of God's actions. If only the book of Leviticus or Joshua were the Hebrew canon then I might think the portrayal of God is too heavy on one side - the harshness of His judgment.
In light of all the books (and even other instances in the problematic books) I conclude that with the Canaanite conquest the severe end of the very wide spectrum is represented.
I don't pretend that such stories are easy to read. But I maintain that they are not the only revelation of God's nature.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Are you ever frustrated by the fact your religion/ideology has given you such weak and abysmally subjective "evidence" to substantiate an important element in the mythology you subscribe to?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The difficult stories are not devastating to my faith in Christ.
But they are difficult.
The Person most qualified to say the God of the OT was evil would have been Jesus Christ. Nowhere does He say what you want to say. Rather Jesus referred to His Father as "Righteous Father".
So I lean on God knowing something more than you and I know.
This comparison matches with the natural creation.
What I mean is if the creative power and managerial skill of a typical person like you were compared to the creative and managerial skill of God the Creator, I think many billion fold wisdom and knowledge is displayed by the Creator over you.
Correspondingly, I believe in the moral universe His wisdom and knowledge far exceed us. Eventually, you do have to trust someone. So I trust that someday, I may come to realize more about the Canaanite judgment than I can appreciate today.
I don't even think "genocide" may be the best term for what happened. But I am studying that.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
There were people in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s who were demonized and then subjected to genocide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where you are probably going is that that was parallel in all respects. But I don't think the 30s and 40s in Europe was exactly equivalent.
In the Old Testament one whole book, the book of Ruth is dedicated to one of these "demonized" people to prove that God's grace overruled the cursed Moabites. They were forbidden to enter the congregation of Israel up to the tenth generation.
The book of Ruth shows God circumventing His rejection of a people because higher, more noble priorities were found in them.
Jonah is another whole book dedicated to exception shown to enemies of Israel. That is one entire book in the canon.
Things are balanced out this way to appreciate more than just one side of God's character.
Many other factors like this I notice in studying the Bible.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Thank goodness there is historical evidence that allows us to weigh up what happened and reject the declarations of the victims' "guilt" and the subsequent punitive actions of the perpetrators of that genocide.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hatred of God toward sin must be revealed before the meaning of Christ dying for ALL the sins of everyone on earth for all history can be contemplated.
It would not make much sense for the Gospel of Luke to immediately have followed Genesis. But when we get a good dose of the Divine Anger against man's sinning, we can marvel at what this is leading to in the New Testament.
That is the good news that all of God's wrath burned upon His own Son. that eternally sinners might be justified. And according to the teaching of Jesus, apparently some of those judged people in the Old Testament may have a favorable eternal destiny though they were temporally judged.
IE.
" Truly I say to you, It will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city." (Matt. 10:15)
This Jesus spoke concerning a city which rejected the preaching of the the disciples of Jesus. While immediate judgment did not fall upon them as God forebear, the level of their guilt was more serious than some other OT cities that underwent a swifter judgment - (if you consider 440 years of tolerance from God as "swift" ).
Yes, the history of Joshua is difficult in places. But it is not an insurmountable problem to my trust in the Son of God.
28 Sep 15
Originally posted by sonshipI am making no "accusatory analysis against the God of the Bible", the nature of whom and revelation is, I believe, a figment of your imagination; I am saying that your evidence and method is weak and your ideology is therefore not coherent and is overly reliant on being shored up by your personal sincerity and enthusiasm. You pass yourself off as a 'historian' when you are more akin to a poetry or literature critic who adores the only author he analyzes and thinks that this personal devotion constitutes evidence of something more than simply the degree of personal devotion at work.
I could say "Who is writing this criticism? FMF? Oh, therefore it has to be anti-theistic. And an accusatory analysis against the God of the Bible could be the only possible outcome of his opinion. "