What About Old Testament Genocide?

[@Unethical.FandubsGames]

You know the easiest way to spot evil is to look for people who justify easily avoidable acts of extreme cruelty and malice -- and then they go out of their way to explain to you how it was a good thing overall.

[@Thundawich]

How can something not be race-based if you end up killing literal infants? Those literal infants weren't engaging in the behaviours that supposedly warrant you being killed.

[@2ahdcat]

Like Allah, the Christian God is a God of love and peace. LOL 🤣🤣

[@BerenMace]

@@2ahdcat i mean they are the same god.

[@2ahdcat]

@@BerenMace True enough

[@lydiaalexian1435]

"God cares about the victims of ritualistic infantcide." Proceeds to order infantcide.

[@monotheist..]

bible is not reliably copy have many interpolation and have error and need repair so we can got the pure bible with original word ,quran is reliably copied that was scholars said also have scientififc n historical accuracy n many scholars n unitarian said jesus is not god or yahweh but prophet, god suppose to get the fact right in history n in the world n quran doesnt have that error like bible does, its reasonable to choose quran, also quran doesnt have interpolation thats why i choose islam. by reasonable proof i want god to exist if quran n bible is wrong then what? make new religion? one of these two need to be right this two is major and historical religion that founded by big influence people like muhammad n jesus taht exist n they were abraham decendant abrahamic religion need to be correct, i saw exorcism that need to be explain by god existance n god to protect yourself from demon because in bible jesus even said demon cannot cast out demon so god is needed, quran is closer to its claim of truth

[@wonderpeter5231]

It positively disturbes me to see a human mind make a video with generic corporate animation style and happy elevator music casually justify genocide.

[@fatefullyricist765]

The fact that this video seems to justify mass murder is disturbing.

[@farrex0]

It is even worse, one thing is trying to justify. It is another thing entirely to not only justify but conclude that it was a moral act and the one behind it (God) is the paragon of virtue and morality.

[@ivankovacic7466]

They could just win a war against cananites and outlaw human sacrifice. No need to kill the people

[@terrycrosslin7866]

@@jarrodpurvis2611 It sure does

[@kylewilson1022]

Who gave these people life?

[@StephGrobler1]

You don't have any ground to judge God on.

[@hotblackdesiato3022]

Where is the evidence the Canaanites were any more "wicked" than any other group of people? And couldn't God have appeared to them as he did to the Israelites, do a few miracles, and instruct them on being righteous? Watching apologists twist and squirm to deny what's in the Bible is sad.

[@ghenulo]

The evidence is that Hebrews are descendents of Canaanites.

[@LM-jz9vh]

@@ghenulo Indeed. The Israelite religion evolved out of the Canaanite religion. *YHWH/Yahweh was some minor deity from the southern Levant who over time took on the imagery and attributes of the older mythical Canaanite deities El and Baal.* He only became the one "true" god when some Yahweh-only Israelites/fanatics pushed that agenda. Dr Christine Hayes who lectures on the Hebrew Bible at Yale University outlines this in lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards. Also lecture 8 from 12:00 to 19:00 minutes. kzbin.info/www/bejne/npC4nqh7d9KGa80 kzbin.info/www/bejne/oYSUaJeCqrmDmpI Also, inscriptions were found in the form of blessings, referencing *"Yahweh and his Asherah."* Asherah was originally the wife of the Canaanite deity El, so the merging of Yahweh with El is obvious. www.seeker.com/amphtml/gods-wife-edited-out-of-the-bible-almost-1766083399.html *The Canaanite pantheon was conceived as a divine clan, headed by the supreme god El; the gods collectively made up the elohim. Through the centuries, the pantheon of Canaanite gods evolved, so that El and Asherah were more important in earlier times, while Baal and his consorts came to fore in later years.* *Asherah-early semitic Mother goddess, "Lady of the sea," *consort of El*, also called Athirat,**the mother of 70 gods*** ((Inscriptions were found in the form of blessings, referencing *"Yahweh and his Asherah."* Asherah was originally the wife of El according to the older Ugaritic/Canaanite texts. Baal was one of their sons)) *El-the chief deity, god of the sky, father of many lesser gods (including Baal) and ruler of the divine assembly, also worshiped by the Israelites* *El Elyon-Special title of El as "God most High"* The Book of Genesis itself describes the patriarch Abraham as a worshiper of El-also called El Shaddai and *El Elyon-building altars, offering sacrifices, and paying tithes to him.* www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Canaanite_Religion#Relationship_to_biblical_religion *Before the rise of Israel, Asherah was the wife of El, the head god of the Canaanite pantheon. According to the archeological evidence, the people who became Israelites were mostly native Canaanites who settled in the hills of what is now the West Bank, while it seems that small but influential groups also migrated there from the south in the Midian (in and around the Araba Valley in Sinai).* As the Bible itself testifies, that is where Yahweh veneration appears to have originated, and, in a process that in this respect resonates with the Moses story, *the migrants introduced Yahweh to the native Canaanites who were becoming Israelites.* **Over time, El declined and merged into Yahweh. As part of that process, Yahweh inherited Asherah from El as his wife.** www.google.com/amp/s/mythologymatters.wordpress.com/2014/10/06/yahwehs-divorce-from-the-goddess-asherah-in-the-garden-of-eden/amp/ *Many of these features of the god El will sound remarkably familiar to the astute reader of the Hebrew Bible because of their application to YHWH, the god of Israel.* The Ugaritic corpus, which *PRE-DATES* the vast majority of the writings of the Hebrew Bible by at least several centuries, is perhaps the most illuminating body of literature for the study of the Hebrew Bible because of its close thematic, linguistic, and stylistic connections to that corpus. Furthermore, the Ugaritic texts are the only texts from the ancient world that give us direct, native insight into the religious worldview of a society that worshiped many of the gods polemicized against in the Hebrew Bible, and most especially the god Baal and the goddess Asherah (Ugaritic Athirat). *In this case we are able to see that the ancient Israelites, as disclosed through the Hebrew Bible, appropriated a number of terms, themes, and titles from the god El in their portrayals of YHWH.* In contrast, there is no significant evidence that El was imagined as a warrior god like YHWH or Baal. **Moreover, like Baal, but entirely unlike El, YHWH is frequently associated with storm imagery.** Additionally, in much Israelite religious practice throughout the monarchic period, *YHWH had a divine consort, the goddess Asherah ((originally the wife of El according to the older Ugaritic/Canaanite texts)), the Hebrew equivalent of Ugaritic Athirat.[11]* www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2010/03/when-jehovah-was-not-the-god-of-the-old-testament-part-ii/amp/ When the *Most High [Hebrew: Elyon]* gave to the nations their inheritance, When he separated the children of men [Hebrew: Adam], He set the bounds of the peoples According to the number of the children of Israel. (Deuteronomy 32:8 , ASV) *According to the above passage, Elyon (title for El as "God Most High") (by the way, if you didn’t notice, this is not Yahweh) divided up the nations and set boundaries (borders) around them. These nations were "numbered" according to the "sons of Elohim."* Genesis chapter 10, commonly referred to as the "Table of Nations," lists the nations descended from Noah through his three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth. The total number of nations in this list is *seventy.* *((Refer back to the previous part of my post where it states Asherah is the mother of 70 gods and wife of El))* The ancient city of Ugarit was discovered in 1928 in Syria. The height of the Ugaritic civilization was around the 12th Century BCE making them contemporaries with the Israelites. Also, the religion and language of the Ugarit people are very similar to that of the Israelites. Excavations of the site revealed an ancient library filled with clay tablets. *One such tablet states that El Elyon had seventy sons (the Elim) and each son was allocated to a specific people ((El and Asherah had 70 sons)). Many of these sons of El are mentioned by name, including El of Shaddai and El of Beriyt.* *Can you see the close parallels between Deuteronomy 32:8, Genesis 10 and the Ugarit tablets? According to these sources, Elyon divided up all the nations into* **seventy** *nations ((El and Asherah had 70 sons)), one for each of his sons (Elim). Not a very monotheistic view of Elohim is it?* sites.google.com/site/yahwehelohiym/sons-of-god/the-boundaries-of-the-nations When the *Most High (’elyôn)* gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated humanity, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of divine beings. For Yahweh’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage. There are two points to take away from this passage. First, the passage presents an apparently older mythic theme that describes when the divine beings, that is each deity in the divine counsel, were assigned and allotted their own nation. *Israel was the nation that Yahweh received. Second, Yahweh received his divine portion, Israel, through an action initiated by the god El, here identifiable through his epithet “the Most High.” In other words, the passage depicts two gods: one, the Most High (El), is seen as assigning nations to the divine beings or gods (the Hebrew word is elohim, plural “gods”) in his council; the other, Yahweh, is depicted as receiving from the first god, the Most High, his particular allotment, namely the people of Israel.* ((Here Yahweh is subordinate to El)) Similarly, in another older tradition now preserved in Numbers 21:29, the god Chemosh is assigned to the people of Moab. *Other biblical passages reaffirm this archaic view of Yahweh as a god in El’s council. Psalm 82:1 speaks of the “assembly of El,” Psalm 29:1 enjoins “the sons of El” to worship Yahweh, and Psalm 89:6-7 lists Yahweh among El’s divine council.* ((Yahweh is subordinate to El and is one of his sons)) Thus there seems to be ample evidence in the biblical record to support the claim that as Yahweh become the supreme national deity of the Israelites, he began to usurp the imagery, epithets, and old cultic centers of the god El. *This process of assimilation even morphed the linguistic meaning of the name El, which later came to mean simply “god,” so that Yahweh was then directly identified as ’el-thus Joshua **22:22**: “the god of gods is Yahweh” (’el ’elohim yhwh).* ((El became a generic term for God after they got merged together)) contradictionsinthebible.com/are-yahweh-and-el-the-same-god/ When the *Most High* divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. For the Lord’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance. *Some scholars who have used the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint to reconstruct the authentic version of the verse say that “children of Israel” was stuck in as a replacement for “sons of El.” With that lost phrase restored, a verse that was cryptic suddenly makes sense: El-the most high god, Elyon-divided the world’s people into ethnic groups and gave one group to each of his sons ((El and Asherah had 70 sons)). And Yahweh, one of those sons, was given the people of Jacob.* Apparently at this point in Israelite history (and there’s no telling how long ago this story originated) *Yahweh isn’t God, but just a god-and a son of God, one among many.* ((Here Yahweh is subordinate to El and is one of his sons)) *So how does Yahweh rise through the ranks? How does a god initially consigned to a lower level of the pantheon eventually merge with the chief god, El, and even, in a sense, supplant him? …* evolutionofgod.net/question_israelite religionatthemargins.com/2011/07/the-most-heiser-yahweh-and-elyon-in-psalm-82-and-deuteronomy-32/

[@worldview730]

As well as them being the off springs of Ham son of Noah who save the world from the flood

[@degas]

I noticed that the World Child Mortality Rate has been dropping over the years… I find it interesting that our sky buddy is starting to get more involved in lowering those numbers lately. Definitely his work at hand…….and definitely NOT the advancement in the science/medical field. Oh that sky buddy, he so silly. 😳🙄

[@jeremytherobloxevangelist6160]

Sky buddy that dont live in the sky wowzers

[@degas]

@@jeremytherobloxevangelist6160 Sorry Jeremy…. Shoe Buddy then 😉🙂🤣

[@FHBStudio]

It's strange how first the argument is to justify the genocide, and then the last argument is "Oh but it's exaggeration and hyperbole." In addition, genocide doesn't need to be complete to still be considered genocide.

[@BGLEE001]

Well they did kill a lot of people in the land, but the objective was to destroy the culture practices and laws of that country as a whole. A place where idol worship encourages sacrificing of babies (Molak) a common pagan act in that culture. The principle was that God wanted country as a whole to repent of those kinds of acts and they deliberately refused. So He wanted to bring His righteous to the land and establish His Kingdom of good, a foreshadow of Revelation.

[@FHBStudio]

@@BGLEE001 Still this story lies in stark contrast to the one I was referencing. Why spare a blasphemous city for the life of one innocent but destroy an entire nation without even bothering to check? Besides, it's impossible for a country to repent as a whole, as not all individuals within that country will agree with repenting. It is the complete opposite of the first story, in the sense that if god indeed were to destroy a country unless it repent as a whole, that even a single individual not repentant would have god destroy it. The first story is about not destroying a people if there is even one innocent among them. The other story is about destroying an entire people if there is even one sinner among them.

[@BGLEE001]

@@FHBStudio - In Sodom & Gomora the sexual sin has been woven into the culture of its society. God knew the hearts off all of those in that place just as He knows all hearts in Canaan. They rejected God. The principle was for the Israelites not to be influenced by their pagan rituals. What story are you talking about with God wiping out a whole nation if one sinner lived in it?

[@FHBStudio]

@@BGLEE001 I mean the genocides referenced in the video. So in Sodom and Gomorrah, the whole point is that the righteous don't perish with the wicked. Yet, in the stories/genocides in the video, entire nations are wiped out since they have to repent as a collective. Thus, if there is a nation where everyone is righteous and repents but for one, the nation as a whole still perishes due to one sinner. That was my point.

[@BGLEE001]

@@FHBStudio - The video was actually referring to The Israelites driving out the Canaanites to obtain the Promised Land in Deuteronomy. Your referring to God destroying the city of Sodom and Gomorrah with sulfur storm in Genesis due to the people committing sodomy in the place. There is no mention in the Bible of God smiting a sinful land with one righteous person in the land apart of that killing.

[@MaryJane4and20th]

like did this girl just try to justify genocide?????

[@RoninTF2011]

Yes she did....

[@bible4truth]

Yes. She did because she doesn’t understand the Bible

[@RoninTF2011]

@@bible4truth lol, then what is the "true" understanding of the bible, and on what evidence would base this interpretation?

[@bible4truth]

@@RoninTF2011 Sure! kzbin.info/www/bejne/borNc4yfd6-Nqqc

[@RoninTF2011]

@@bible4truth how is that relevant...not. I was asking: then what is the "true" understanding of the bible, and on what evidence would base this interpretation?

[@raudan3105]

Raise your hand if you're disturbed that someone made this and was not ethically conflicted to upload it! If your religion forces you to defend genocide, it's time to give it up.

[@Nemo12417]

The term "genocide" was created by Raphael Lemkin in the 1940s. He originally began his research by studying the Armenian genocide, though he later got a more direct case study in the Holocaust. When he submitted his research to the United Nations, he actually had to water a lot of it down, as his initial research placed a heavy emphasis on cultural genocide (in his case, the Nazi program of "Germanization", but more offensively, it would have made nearly every colonial power guilty of ongoing genocide). The completed draft defines genocide as: "[G]enocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: a. Killing members of the group; b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." Even if you read the Torah and conclude that the genocide depicted was a glorious, beautiful thing and that the victims were pretty much orcs from Lord of the Rings, it still meets the criteria for genocide. And that's the watered down version adopted by the UN.

[@isidoreaerys8745]

I mean. Genocide is really the endgame for all the disciples of the god of Abraham as you are basically an orc to them before you submit your will to their demand of mental slavery.

[@assyriannahrin]

According to my knowledge what made Lemkin doing this was the Assyrian genocide of Semel1933 it was so horrifying that he went and studied why this like this happens and how to protect the victims

[@aubreyleonae4108]

Wow, thats awesome thanks.

[@muiluttaja8908]

Go and watch Viced Rhino's reaction.

[@proverb996]

Waiting for centuries for them to repent? I thought he was all knowing, surely he already knew before creation that they would never repent. Perhaps he is not all knowing then.

[@paradiseagent5881]

Urgh, God does actually mention to abraham that he's going to punish the amorites after a set number of generations when their sin reaches it's full measure. He knew, he just didn't punish them prematurely

[@RoninTF2011]

@@paradiseagent5881 ...oh dear bronce age warlord justifying their deeds with propagada against victims of their land grab. now isn't that nice

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

@@paradiseagent5881 Jehovah never said anything. Its an imaginary being. There MAY be a god but all testable gods fail testing, including Jehovah as there was no Great Flood.

[@jaclo3112]

@@RoninTF2011 Isn't it interesting that the abrahamic god is so heavily invested in real estate?

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

@Harupert Beagleton Well its a nasty and imaginary Canaanite god, what do you expect? Desert dwellers have hostile gods because they lived in a hostile land. And never experienced an world wide flood because no one did.

[@JeffreyBoser]

Can someone explain to me how God would 'wait patiently for centuries' for something that, as God, he knows will not happen? Omniscient, suuuuuuuuure.

[@Ponera-Sama]

"Because God is just, he cares about the victims of injustice." But most of the victims of the injustice done by the Canaanites were themselves Canaanites. The problem with this approach is that God allegedly commanded to kill the ritually abused women and the infants meant to be sacrificed along with the people who were abusing and sacrificing them. This isn't remotely hard to understand. "The claims of utter destruction of the Canaanites were an exaggeration and not meant literally." Like when king Saul was commanded to utterly destroy the Amalekites including their livestock and was allegedly punished by God for not killing all of the livestock? Was that part of the story also an exaggeration?

[@Mr.NiceUK]

""Because God is just, he cares about the victims of injustice." Begging the question much?

[@speakthetruth5308]

This suggest that the men who wrote parts of the bible created their God in their own image and uses him to justify their barbarism.

[@jdaze1]

The bible has been corrupted by lying scribes. Jer 8.8. God never orders the death of innocent people who have not been warned and given plenty of time to escape with thier innocent children. He always judges with plague, famine, and weather. I dont believe half of what the OT says. Thats why we were told to establish the word of truth by 2 or 3 witnesses line upon line. God never changes. He is a just and fair God. We were warned several times everything in the bible is not true.

[@Ujasoncook9267]

This is a display of psychopathic behavior

[@isidoreaerys8745]

Yes. Gen Z’s Psychologists will look back at this one day when we’ve woken up from this terrifying mass hysteria as archived footage of the mental illness that can infect entire societies

[@proteus404]

God commanded both man and woman, young and old to be destroyed by the edge of the sword, please explain to me how the behavior a 3 year old child is criminally worthy of being killed by someone wielding a sword and morally correct to end their life.

[@WeirdWonderful]

Also it's funny you quote Jonah as a perfect example of your God being perfectly willing and able to care about people and sending a prophet to avoid ""having"" to kill everyone. It shows how in this story your God had a way to avoid having to arrange for the mass murder of children and infants and deliberately chose to not take it.

[@Martial-Mat]

I hope you have a ticket for the olympics because you are a world class mental gymnast.

[@tomitiustritus6672]

"It's ok, 'cause god is a wholesome, loving and merciful genocidal maniac."

[@jdaze1]

Jer 8.8.

[@tomitiustritus6672]

@@jdaze1 Your point being?

[@jdaze1]

@@tomitiustritus6672 Not everything in the bible is true. However, the Caananite story can't be confirmed either way.

[@tomitiustritus6672]

@@jdaze1 Of course. Most events in the bible that can be checked against historical and archeological sources are either grossly inaccurate or plain fiction, so why should the parts that refer to events we can not check against sources be expected to be diffrerent? But what matters here is whether people believe in its historicity and even more important, If, how they evaluate those events if they believe them historical. The lady in this video clearly believes in the historicity and defends the events as just on the basis of praising god for his mercy and justice. So basically, her response to someone claiming that the biblical god is genocidal is not to deny, but to claim that it was a just and merciful act of genocide. Given, she is a bit contradictory, as she first justifies it and then tries to play down what she just justified.

[@jdaze1]

@@tomitiustritus6672 I agree.

[@asianhippy]

Another person reading the bible with rose-tinted glasses.

[@Dreadnoughtunicorn]

God *all powerful* God * all good* Also God *Gets people to kill eachother for their own good, get's upset when people assume otherwise*

[@whiskeybrown262]

So even the babies had to go? The babies!?!

[@Hannibu]

That clearly shows how sick this god is.

[@randylester8274]

Evil not sick just plain evil

[@Bugsy0333]

@@randylester8274 No Sick

[@isidoreaerys8745]

Wicked. Yaweh is a monster. And his salvation? His grace? Holds a gun at your head and says “tell me you love me and that I’m the greatest person in the universe... Or else”

[@krankarvolund7771]

2:50 So God is all-powerful, but cannot make humans stop fighting? XD

[@bluesaway4212]

+Krankar Volund Yes, God is all powerful. He has also given human beings free will. He has told us in the Bible how we should live - that we shouldn't be fighting, that we should treat each other with love, forgiveness, compassion. Beyond that, He doesn't "make" people do anything because He doesn't force us to do His bidding like slaves or puppets.

[@krankarvolund7771]

@@bluesaway4212 Can you point me the exact verse of the Bible where it says that humans have free will please? :D And well, God is all-powerful, he should be able to find a way to stop humans fighting without breaking their free-will, he knows all and can do all ^^

[@bluesaway4212]

​@@krankarvolund7771 Maybe we, as humans, should think about our responsibility in this. God has given us the necessary knowledge and ability to live in peace with each other if we choose. If all of us made the effort to do that, it would solve the problem. Maybe we should obey God's instruction and do our part, instead of continuing to fight and do wrong and then expecting God to fix everything for us. To answer your question about the verse - the issue of free will is addressed / referred to / implied throughout the Bible, not just in one specific verse. It can be traced all the way back to Genesis 3, where Adam and Eve use their free will to disobey God. Jesus also refers to free will in the New Testament, in verses like John 5: 39 - 40 and Matthew 23: 37 - 38, among others. Such verses make it pretty clear that God has given humans the freedom to make their own choices. Hope they're helpful to you :)

[@krankarvolund7771]

@@bluesaway4212 "Maybe we should obey God's instruction" Last time I checked the instructions were "See these gys, kill them all, I'll give you their land" "Maybe we should obey God's instruction and do our part" The problem is, with all the will of the world to not fight, when the other side want to fight you have two options, die or fight ^^' Okay, so the fact that the Bile use the word "will" means that God gave free will to all humanity? That's weak at best ^^'

[@bluesaway4212]

@@krankarvolund7771 "The problem is, with all the will of the world to not fight, when the other side want to fight you have two options, die or fight" That's why I said that for the problem to be solved, ALL of us have to make the effort - not just one side. "Last time I checked the instructions were "See these gys, kill them all, I'll give you their land" The context of that has already been explained in this video. Here's another one that explains it further: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b3eqp2yXhKiWr7c It's not an instruction that applies to any of us today. On the contrary, the New Testament is full of commands to treat others (even our enemies) with love, compassion, forgiveness, understanding, non-violence, etc. Those are the ones I'm talking about.

[@jamaalmontemayor8173]

Not even two minutes in and can tell this girl is crazy. 1. Genocide does not have to race based the Tutsi were black Rwandans and German Jews were still white Germans the Israelites attacked the Canaanites based on their culture religion language etc. Even if they didn't kill all of them they forced them out of their homes which is ethnic cleansing not better at all. 2. You mention victims and killing of innocents but the Israelites killed children and non combatants how is that any better. 3. If what we know about the Canaanites comes from the bible sources sympathetic to the Israelites who admitted to a text book genocide then these accounts are unreliable at best.

[@raniamararmousa7048]

Thank you. This was a real good explanation ❤

[@davidfarrar2454]

"There were even rules against needlessly destroying the nearby trees". It's too bad similar rules weren't in place for the nearby babies!

[@freddan6fly]

So if i plant a tree it is OK to kill a baby? One for one? I don't think I'll try. Think of the defence in court: "I read in the bible that if you plant a tree you can kill"

[@stargirl6659]

if god is so good, how could he command his people to do such a thing? simple, he isn't, and it's all human beings making up deities to justify their actions. honestly, no mental gymnastics is necessary here.

[@juliusjanardhanseptimus352]

You hit the nail on the head.

[@MrBrokenwrenches]

So when god flooded the world how many floating baby corpses do you think the ark bumped into?

[@kirbotastic]

At least three.

[@kippercat123]

One thing I didnt hear covered... the order to kill children and animals. Those 3 things she covered didnt cover children and animals. 1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.’” This was not a hyperbole.

[@worldview730]

Very good message, as well as some valid points

[@WeirdWonderful]

Oh and one of those "limits" was that, to avoid the entire population but the women (who would be then used as sex slaves) being slaughtered, the entire population would have to willingly give themselves up to the Hebrew, into slavery. Funny how you don't mention that specific detail.

[@kevinkeyes6625]

Nice spin but you'll never convince me that these vicious barbarian scribes from 500 BC had Humanity in their best interest. How do we know that the butchering of the Canaanites wasn't just some kind of holy land grab?

[@spiridion2838]

Thanks for demonstrating how morally bankrupt you have to be to defend genocide & massacres commanded by God in the bible Brooke.

[@cskinner0129]

In this passage he didn’t rescue babies from child sacrifice. He had them killed with swords and stones. You have to be aware of this right? As for the claim to hyperbole, God literally overthrows Saul because he didn’t kill *every living thing* as God specified to him.

[@NickdeVera]

got here from Viced Rhino. this vid is an amazing specimen of weapons-grade bullshit.

[@K55365]

The god of Abraham is a vengeful god.

[@Y-AR]

People commented without "watching the video" Typical destructive criticism.

[@Deinonuchus]

So, why didn't God just go to the Canaanites and tell them he disapproved of their actions? Why did he just let them stew in their own juices for centuries? And don't give me that "free will" garbage. He was constantly telling the Israelites what he did and did not like. It's odd that God never, ever, talks to anyone but those who already worship him.

[@ayandamafuyeka1952]

Because he's a just God and punishes sin.

[@PR-cq4zc]

Amen. Thank you for getting it right.

[@PR-cq4zc]

That's what the bible says.

[@RisenSlash]

Sounds like something Hitler would say.

[@ayandamafuyeka1952]

@@RisenSlash I beg to differ. Hitler killed millions because they were different from him. The God of the Bible punished nations whom he had been warning for centuries to stop sinning. This doesn't stop with the Israelites in the wilderness only. Even the same Israel that God would send to destroy the other nations also got the same treatment from God whenever they would sin. Read the book of Judges, King of Kings, Chronicles, Jeremiah, Daniel etc. The same kind of “genocide” punishment that the Israelites delivered to other nations when they were sent by God. God also gave the Israelites that same punishment whenever they would sin, the Assyrians, Ammonites, and with Babylon being the ultimate example out of all the nations that God used to punish Israel for sinning.

[@PR-cq4zc]

God is NOT like Hitler nor any other person. He is GOD and can and will do anything He pleases.

[@DanielApologetics]

Brilliant - even better than the last one! After studying this topic for 8 months, I can get behind this video presentation.

[@BobSmith-ew5oi]

Another brainwashed person with no morals and one read of the bible shows wear this immorality comes from as all starts with god preferring to torture people then have peace.

[@disrxt]

Evil, pure evil. That's what your god has done to you.

[@GrizzlyDude]

So..... you are saying to worship a God or die?

[@mitchelmcmurray3468]

I think that it would not matter what god did you would still believe no matter what

[@palladin1337]

Alright, let's take a look at these three reasons and see if they actually hold up. "God's command for Israel to drive out the Canaanites was not race based, but behavior based, as the Canaanites engaged in acts that would be considered criminal in civilized societies." And the very first problem here is that you are blatantly reading modern standards of behavior into an ancient culture *and* an old story book, when the fact of the matter is that whatever was considered 'moral' or 'legal' at the time was *vastly* different than what we would accept today. It is also based on the culture in question, and considering the fact that your preferred culture is supposed to be okay with anything so long as it is supposedly a command from your God, you really, *really* don't have any room to criticize the practices of other peoples. There's also the small problem where *the post-rationalization does not matter, because they were still commanded to wipe out an entire culture.* This entire story is based on the same 'reasoning' as the rationalization for Noah's flood, which is the idea that a culture is so corrupt that everyone is somehow evil. However, anyone who actually understands human behavior knows that isn't even remotely true, so both of these actions condemned many more innocent people to death than guilty people. "God is willing to work with people where they are, not where they ought to be. He works within messy human cultures to move them towards redemption." And unfortunately for the cultures in question, his methods make him look like a hammer instead of a scalpel since he seems more than willing to wipe entire cultures from the surface of the Earth if he doesn't get his way or if they threaten his 'chosen people.' This 'argument' is supposed to make him sound benevolent, but when your God has wiped an entire planet clean just to kill some bad people, it really doesn't work like you want. "The Old Testament's mention of many Canaanite survivors shows that its 'total kill' language is simply ancient Near Eastern exaggeration or hyperbole." Ah, so this particular story isn't to be taken literally.... Wait, don't you Apologists constantly advocate for a literal interpretation of your religious texts? Or, does that only apply to the bits which make your God seem good? At best, this 'argument' is hypocritical, and at worst it is another attempt at rationalizing an unjustifiable act after the fact.

[@petermartin4298]

The real question would be, " If the sexist, racist, pro slavery thug god of the bible is so good..?.. Wait It isn't . Don't worry."

[@Ozzyman200]

A good reminder of how evil the Bible is, thank you.

[@ProtestantismLeftBehind]

Your response in a good reminder how people are clueless

[@Ozzyman200]

@@ProtestantismLeftBehind Ah name calling. Well done you. If you love the bible, you love Putin.

[@drugilbert2447]

The childish babble of zealots

[@jokingker2553]

6:30 How dare they! That's sinners talk. I like how she is offended if you don't like genocide.

[@smochygrice465]

*Doubt your beliefs? Have questions about changing or leaving your faith?* *You are not alone* *Visit Recovering from Religion for more info* *Peace Love Empathy Friends*

[@RoninTF2011]

So, these allegations against other tribes...is there ANY evidence for these actually beeing correct? Or is it one warring tribe trying to justify their horrid deeds in their own propaganda book?

[@bible4truth]

She doesn’t understand the Bible.

[@RoninTF2011]

@@bible4truth How so?

[@kyliereed200]

Yes I am wondering the same thing.

[@jaclo3112]

It's backed by the evidence "Trust me, bro".

[@pnwmeditations]

There's something very creepy about a slick yt video with modern graphics justifying genocide.

[@jordancarter9064]

I love how you only mention the Canaanites, there were other groups of people killed as well. Also none of the points justify genocide - there are lots of ways to change society to stop them from eating babies. And if its all hyperbole what was the point of your other points?

[@servantofyhwh6064]

Bro what you really think it's easy to convince people in the B.C era to stop misbehaving? Even God's chosen people the Israelites were disobedient. Judgment must be taken place for such vile acts and pay attention to the video. God tried and waited years for the nations to repent but they never did

[@jordancarter9064]

@@servantofyhwh6064 isreal won militarially against them though, and from there they could have made it a crime to kill babies for instance and enforce it like any law. We also have no indication that the people of canaan actually knew God was sitting there waiting to repent and furthermore as far as i know, a messenger was never sent for them to even let them know to repent (correct me if im wrong tho) - it was simply that they had a different religion that did vile things. Also remember how God stepped in and choose to give the isrealites laws? God could have also done that one. There's some ideas

[@andrebrown8969]

What is wrong with you people?

[@aubreyleonae4108]

"Hard to imagine a life with constant war?" What color is the rain on your planet?

[@j316min]

To refer to God’s “goodness” is actually a reference to His moral perfection. We want to associate it with being nice or putting up with everything. It’s all moral.

[@kirbotastic]

Meh, subjective morality. Canaanites loved those juicy baby sacrifices.

[@RisenSlash]

Y'all understand "genocide" means they killed *all* of the Canaanites, right?

[@j316min]

@@RisenSlash actually they didn’t. They were disobedient. The price for their sin is felt today.

[@randylester8274]

So Gods goodness is to create genocide against a people so god can take there land? This genocide included innocent children too? What kind of god do you worship? SICK SICK SICK

[@jaclo3112]

@@j316min So what disobedient things and sins were the toddlers doing that they had to pay the price of being brutally slaughtered in a mass genocide?

[@---yl4mf]

Oh, utter destruction is a hyperbole, but the atrocities they commited to deserve this war we're precise and accurate?

[@longcastle4863]

She bocks comments showing how much of a threat Christianity is to American democracy.

[@FHBStudio]

Okay so you know that story about that city god was gonna smite but he'd not if there was even one innocent person in that city? Yet here he commands genocide on an entire people without care for the individual. What is said in the video, "God cares about the victims of these crimes" doesn't add up when you consider there'd be innocent victims in that culture. For example, children who were abused in ritualistic and incestuous manners. I think taking these stories literally is a faulty way of dealing with them. It's seeing a tree and not considering it might be a forest up close.

[@sebastianbancroft7184]

I think you should read that story again, it doesn’t even mention the word innocent or one individual person. I think you mean “righteous” because you can be innocent and not righteous. God said if He found at least ten righteous people in the city, He would not destroy it for their sake. The lowest he would go was ten “innocent” people. The problem with criticizing apologetics and being illiterate in scripture, is that you look foolish.

[@FHBStudio]

@@sebastianbancroft7184 It's not so much a critique of the scripture as it is a discussion of the ideas presented. I don't mind others knowing more about the story and helping filling me in on things I'm not aware of or have forgotten over the years. I don't take it literally, first of all, and second, the things we take away from the stories are not literal either. They are necessarily abstractions of moral principles, and those are more worthy of discussion than whether or not the events happened as described or happened at all.

[@sebastianbancroft7184]

@@FHBStudio Well I disagree. The details of the story not only help you with the context but they also give you a better understanding of the characters involved. This is more important than the moral of the story because the Bible tries to highlight the relationship between God and mankind and His plan for our redemption through Jesus. We can read a story and interpret it numerous ways. I could get something out of it that you don’t. But what is clear form the beginning is that we are in rebellion against God and yet He provides a way for us to be forgiven. The stories in the Bible are supposed to help you understand God. Those who are Christian don’t necessarily need to focus the moral principles found in the Bible because God provides it through His law. Scripture is not like the Iliad or the Odyssey where all you can do is analyze the stories and write book reports on them. The Bible has deeper meaning and one message that is persistent from the first page to the last page. That message is God’s plan of salvation for mankind through His Son Jesus the Christ. Also known as simply the Gospel.

[@sebastianbancroft7184]

@@FHBStudio I also forgot to add that while you don’t take these stories literal, I and Christians alike do. Our religion is based on these stories and the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. We could never find common ground even in the slightest because of this difference. I’m not here to “shove my religion down your throat,” I just wanted to correct you on where you were mistaken. Because if you’re going to critique or analyze the Bible stories, then you should get the story right before doing so. If you don’t want to take the Bible literal, that’s fine, but it is written specifically for an audience that will.

[@FHBStudio]

@@sebastianbancroft7184 I thank you for the corrections, as hopefully I can now go into the future being less wrong. I also would like to point your attention to a very interesting answer to the question of belief in god by Jordan Peterson here on youtube called "Who dares say he believes in god?". I'd say the critical part is from 1:24:17 until about 1:26:00 ish, but the entire thing is interesting. I'd say there are no true believers, since everybody sins, and sin invokes divine punishment. To make an analogy: if someone truly believes they can fly, they will not hesitate to jump off of a roof. If they don't jump or if they hesitate, you know they don't actually believe they can fly. If someone says they believe yet they commit a sin, that is, they fail to engage in behavior in line with their professed beliefs, you can tell they are no true believers. It is a harsh standard, but then reality is a harsh judge.

[@---yl4mf]

This thing is comedy gold! Why would god need to redeem the cosmos that he fucking created? How badly did he mess this up?

[@aubreyleonae4108]

What did Abraham do that required God to disallow time for patience etc. yet required that from Abe, comparatively on the spot? The fact that he stopped it is entirely beside the point. God fails his own morality test as do his followers unto the present.

[@AgustianesUmbaraSuwardi]

Thank you for making it concise

[@r0bfleming]

What if someone asks about some of the other genocides? Are they all hyperbole? Was Noah's flood just 40 days of light drizzle leading to some big puddles?

[@Dragonmaster0118]

So "God" cares about the victims and further victimizes the innocent members of their society?

[@mankind157]

Stop blaming religion guys

[@Marc-mp6lf]

Imagine your nationality is canaanite at that time...

[@FRN2013]

Those three are very good points. I would add: (4) The wages of sin is death. Everyone who sins (including you and me) is doomed to die. So God, in his justice, is obviously allowed to command a theocratic nation to be his executioner. Of course ancient Israel is the only theocracy there ever has been or will be.

[@kirbotastic]

Yeah but why them and not some obscure African or Asian nation that existed even before god creating the earth apparently

[@romaniaforever7103]

Возмездие за грех есть смерть. Любой кто совершает грех, заслуживает смерть. Я и ты заслуживаем смерть. Бог в своем правосудие имеет права уничтожить один народ если он не хочет покаяться, этот народ Ханааниты не хотел покается и их грехи были невероятно большие и по этому не один потомок не должен был оставаться в живых даже если бы это был младенец поэтому что младенцы наследовали бы их грехи( грех передаётся по наследству). Этот жестокий суд продолжается до прихода Иисуса Христа в первом веке который заплатил за наши грехи своей кровью на кресте и теперь каждый имеет шанс на прощение и не будет наказан как Бог наказал Ханаан, с помощью израильтян.

[@jaclo3112]

So what sin did the toddlers commit to warrant be horrifically and brutally slaughtered by the Israelites?

[@romaniaforever7103]

@@jaclo3112 The wages of sin is death. Anyone who commits sin deserves death. You and I deserve to die. God in his justice has the right to destroy one people if he does not want to repent, this people of the Canaanites did not want to repent and their sins were incredibly great and therefore not one descendant should have survived even if it was a baby, therefore babies would inherit their sins (sin is inherited) and consequently would have a world were people make human sacrifices now. The judgement and the punishment continue until the coming of Jesus Christ in the first century who paid for our sins with his blood on the cross and now everyone has a chance for forgiveness and will not be punished like God punished Canaan with the help of the Israelites.

[@jaclo3112]

@@romaniaforever7103 so you lied when you said everyone commits sin deserves death as innocent children who didn't commit sin are also put to death as they inherit the sins of their parents that they had no free will over. You do know the entire Christian religion is based on a human sacrifice made for the purpose of blood magic.

[@Refael8219]

So, your last argument destroys the first two...

[@richardlubes5715]

Read all of your ancient book of fairytales. There is a higher bodycount in there as some of the greatest killers who did live on this earth.

[@assyriannahrin]

"common hyperbolic expression" does that mean God is not the same yesterday,today and tomorrow?‼️🤔

[@glenndeal8013]

But come on he says to kills all of them. Women, children ect. How do you defend the killing of a 2 year old. It’s just sick

[@Boss-dj6ix]

She literally just explained it was an exaggeration and common war language back then. Otherwise, why would canaanites still be alive after the war?

[@MichaelSmith-bu6vp]

Point number one was a good response. From there, it went down hill. Answer number three is a poor response. To use the argument of hyperbole will only get you into trouble when it will also have to be applied to other things, if you take that approach. There are much better arguments for the fact that God did not command a genocide at all. And you can answer this without having to manipulate the text by claiming that there is hyperbole. I will give you a hint. (1) Start at Exodus 33:1-2 and follow the trail of the idea that God will "drive out" the Canaanites. That trail will take you through many books in the Old Testament and end with Stephen's speech in Acts 7. So, what was God's intent? (2) Look at the actual testimony of both Rahab and the Gibeonites. What do they tell you that they all know about the plans of Israel and Israel's God? When did those events occur? So, how long had the Canaanites known that Israel was headed their way with the intent to enter the land? Along with that, read Moses' words in the song he created in Exodus 15:14-15. You can start with these things and begin to get a picture of what God intended, and it was not to kill the Canaanites at all. That will give you a little to start with, but there is much more that can be added.

[@juliusjanardhanseptimus352]

You are talking drivel. OT was just a concoction of the Jews to expropriate other people's land, property and wealth. In order to justify genocide, they said it was sanctioned by God.

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

King James Bible - Psalm 137:9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

[@ryr1974]

Your first point is hardly ethically satisfying to say oh its ok god was promoting genocide not because of race (which since this is ethnicity it is hardly much different than race) and oh because they promoted bad activities. That is what people who engage in Genocide always say. Your second point is better but apparently stops on homosexuality for example. Habving watched other videos the idea of God giving us a model of marriage and life in the household of god that has matured enough that within our culture and its changed ideas about homosexuality that two men could be celebrated as something that we could have enjoyed earlier but for the limits of our cultural understandings and our difficulty disassociating homosexuality with the moral degeneracy and sexual immorality condemiemned by those in the early church.

[@FRN2013]

I think you need to re-watch their first point, since you only cited a part of it. I don't understand your rebuttal to the second point. I tried! Besides the three good points in the video, I'd add this one: The wages of sin is death. Everyone who sins (including you and me) is doomed to die. So God, in his justice, is obviously allowed to command a theocratic nation to be the executioner to bring about such death. (Of course ancient Israel is the only theocracy there ever has been or will be.)

[@whiskeybrown262]

Cherry picking your hyperbole here.

[@Justinsatiable]

Lol seems a bit odd that the women and children had to die also. The real reason was given in the OT. They "defiled" the land. But it's not like the canaanites were alone. A number of mediterranean cultures had the same practices.

[@RoninTF2011]

Besides the fact, that there is usually no evidence supporting the child sacrifice claim other then victors accounts of their conquerors....

[@Justinsatiable]

@@RoninTF2011 that's true. The archaeology seems to disagree with such notions

[@RoninTF2011]

@@Justinsatiable ...one can spin it even further. The fact that these storys are used to smear their opponents, makes it pretty clear that child sacrifice was generally seen as a malpractice at that time and culture... If child murder was the norm then, accusing your opponent of it would be like..."and they wear white socks in their sandals" and everyone be like "ok, whatever..." (ok, tbh white socks in sandals ARE a reason for genocide tough ;-) )

[@CS_Lewis]

still there are modern pro-choice who supports abortion🙄born or unborn, life is life

[@jdaze1]

How did the Canaanites know what they were doing was wrong if thats all they knew. Did prophets go to warn them first? Doesnt make sense if they were never warned. Theres must be something about the story we don't know because God always judges justly. He warned Nineveh, Egypt, Israel, etc. Just genociding the innocent without warning is against Gods nature. Theres more to the story we haven't been told.

[@brasasdekentaro6732]

I personally prefer the God of the old testament, severe and vengeful, demonstrating his power over the gods of other civilizations, without touching his heart over the lives that should be sacrificed, since he was above all creation. A conquering God as he should have been in his time.

[@rolfyoutube586]

In reading some of the negative comments about this video, what readily became apparent is that the replies were made by those who did not watch the video but simply cut and pasted atheistic/antagonistic talking points that do not address the content presented. Disappointingly, there are far too many people who do not want to listen, or do not even consider that they might be misrepresenting the objective evidence simply because they do not like it and/or it hurts their vacuous case against the Hebrew Bible. A request. If you disagree with God (and I wish you would not but you are, of course, free to do so), then please do not misrepresent Him nor the Bible.

[@mathgod]

@ Rolf not hard to watch 7 minutes and 22 seconds of this drivel. You believe in god, so you are cool with all the evil he commanded and committed. Okay. Please don’t tell us what morals we should or shouldn’t follow.

[@rolfyoutube586]

@@mathgod Since you don’t know me nor that I was an atheist for 22 years, your accusation of confirmation bias on my part doesn’t bother me. What does bother me is that you apparently didn’t watch the video carefully OR you have no background as to who or what the Canaanites and Israelites were, so please watch the video once carefully and/or let me recommend Paul Copan’s book, “Is God a Moral Monster?” specifically ch. 15-17, especially pg. 184-185 which is a summary of the points.

[@rolfyoutube586]

@@mathgod “Please don’t tell us what morals we should or shouldn’t follow.” Is this your moral? Don’t tell people what morals to follow?Then why are you asking me to follow your moral? (So as you can readily see, telling me not to moralize is actually you also engaging in moralization, i.e. you are asking me not to moralize which is an act of moralization on your part. In any event, thank you sincerely for taking the time to reply and for your patience in reading my response. All the best!

[@juliusjanardhanseptimus352]

You are soooo mistaken. Most believers in Christ are justified in taking a moral stance against this drivel and concoction telling us that the genocide committed was sanctioned by God. IT WAS NOT. Jews justify these acts as sanctioned by God when they were really listening to the devil. If Hitler and his "master race" had said that the genocide committed was sanctioned by God, would you be ok with this ?

[@rolfyoutube586]

@@juliusjanardhanseptimus352 To answer your question, no, of course not. There is no comparison between the claims and acts of Hitler and members of the Nazi party and with the situation of Moses and the ancient Hebrews.

[@JenE3377]

The Aztecs cut out the beating heart of human sacrifices as an offering to their gods. Conquistadors killed them all. Whose side are you on? There are 3 "sides" to be considered. Well?

[@jsingh265]

Old testament god seems like pychopath

[@Shabeck100]

Wonderful video...inspite of the many arrogant, virtue signaling comments. I'm always amazed how people who reject or ignore the Creator God make sweeping moral statements about what "ought to be" & about how God should act. All the while rejecting the only objective standard for morality - the Person of God Himself, revealed in Jesus Christ. And living in a culture that is the fruit of the Judeo-Christian worldview?! Yet many will also support the murder of the unborn & have no concern about human sex trafficking. That is sadly, yet extremely hypocritical.

[@innerfire8937]

If God is good, and He is, how can His commands be evil? By what standard can anyone judge the ultimate judge and authority of the universe?

[@BGLEE001]

Well if God created life and all things, does He have the right to take it away? Plus what was the evil that He committed? He waited for Canaan to repent for their horrific acts and they refused.

[@RESTITVTOR_TOTIVS_HISPANIAE]

You people are sick

[@andreasenstrom7911]

The bible actually says that god made the kanaanite kings hard, as with farrao, so that they had to be wiped out. God wanted to show of his powers. Thats what it says

[@ethelredhardrede1838]

Oh now I see what the problem with this exceedingly immoral video is: You can submit ideas for new videos on our website, or head over to ColsonCenter.org for online courses and more resources! Morals no more come from Chuck Colson than it can from a slavery and genocide supporting book.

[@craighoelscher3774]

So killing babies at their mothers breast is OK but only when they are asking for it. Same thing goes fir babies still in the womb.

[@bgoddard6364]

Deuteronomy 20:16-18, (below) is succinct, not hyperbole--despite(?) ancient communication practices. Also, king Saul lost favor with God for not killing ALL the animals, as he was commanded to do, and he said he did--but gave the excuse that he saved them for offerings!

[@kirbotastic]

Did he kill the tapeworms?

[@tr889]

I would recommend the book "The Unseen Realm" by Dr M. Heiser, the many "ites" commanded to destroyed by God were nephilim. Descendants of angel and human relations of Gen 6 (and further explained in the first book of Enoch)(he also has many youtube videos out there and the Bible Project has worked with him also in videos explaining this)

[@Clockwork427]

You mean the ones that supposedly died in the flood?

[@alohaohana901]

The bible is a very long book. It seems we need another book of equal length to explain it. In another 1000 years will we need a book 4 times the length as more and more cultures appear with their hyperbolic expressions? Why does All-Mighty-God need a girl in her 20's to explain His word?

[@John_.Cabell_.Breckinridge]

Can you guys make a video about the Isreali Palestinian conflict

[@yazyaz2969]

Is the genocide will be happening again??

[@jeffreygunn9709]

None of this is explained in the Bible. Why would God need you to explain this atrocity?

[@freddan6fly]

Cognitive Dissonance trying to explain gods mass murder and child rape.

[@interman7715]

Absolute bs . Apologists are delusional.

[@CCP-Lies]

They know what they're saying but they can't accept the fact that Yahweh was a bloodthirsty dictator

[@craighoelscher3774]

So the account of Joshua was hyperbolic ie exaggerated bullshit? On that we can agree! Congrates , you have converted me to your view of the Bible. The same Bible that women should silent in the Church, on matters about the Church and are not to have any Authority within the Church and nor shall they have Authority over men and preach to men within the Church ( Corinthians 11:3-12, 14:34-35, 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and Titus 1)

[@DigitalHammurabi]

Oof. Bad apologetic take here.

[@ProtestantismLeftBehind]

Great explanation.

[@mysterio448]

The genocides recorded in the Old Testament were more than just spontaneous acts of savagery. There was actually an organized religious basis for it. Leviticus 27:28-29 describes a concept called "herem", which was translated as "devoted" or "devoted to destruction." Anything that was herem was a thing or person that had been set apart as an offering to God -- a sacrifice. The sacrifice could not be substituted or redeemed with money; it had to be destroyed. When God sent the Israelites to Jericho or the Midianites or the Amalekites, each time he used the word herem to describe those peoples and their cities. Essentially, the destruction of the city and every man, woman, child, infant, and livestock in it was itself a ritual blood sacrifice. Afterwards, the people and their goods were burned, and whatever could not be burned was separated and dedicated to the temple treasury. The mechanics are similar to the mechanics of ordinary animal sacrifice: the animal is killed, then the carcass is disembowelled with the entrails and their fat being placed on the altar and the rest set aside, and the part of the animal left on the altar is burned as a pleasing offering to God. Likewise, all of the people of the city are killed, certain parts of the city's contents are separated and set aside, and then everything is burned. Typically in ancient warfare, the soldiers would indulge in material spoils as well as the human spoils of slaves and wives among the people. But in herem warfare, there are no spoils; everything must be devoted to God as a burnt offering.

[@juliusjanardhanseptimus352]

Thanks for the explanation, however disturbing it may be. I compare it to Hitler's genocide.

[@CharlesDickens111]

The main theme of the Bible is not your salvation - it's a kingdom. The Kingdom of Heaven in the Bible always refers to a literal, physical Kingdom on earth. All through history whenever a kingdom or any form of state was established - blood was shed. The main prophetic theme of the Bible is not the birth, life and crucifixion of Christ. God doesn't think much of the day his Son was mocked, spat on and nailed to a chunk of wood. There's about 48 prophecies of that but over 500 involving his return. His return - the Day of the Lord - when he comes back to get his land, stomping his enemies to blood like grapes (Isaiah) and ruling with a rod of iron (Revelation). Getting a kingdom means conquest, which means blood - the Old Testament is drenched in blood because it documents the attempt, but ultimate failure, of Israel to establish the literal, physical Kingdom of Heaven on earth. Joshua came close, so did David - but all the enemies were not vanquished and the people persisted in rebellion. God gave up on them in 606 BC when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and the times of the Gentiles began. The Kingdom of Heaven was promised again when Christ came to earth but the people rejected and killed him and ignored the final plea of the "Crown" (i.e. stoning Stephen, whose name means Crown). For 2000 years there's been no Kingdom of Heaven on offer. We only have the Kingdom of God - which is spirituality, not a literal actual kingdom (Romans 14:17). But his Kingdom will come in what we call "the last days" - he arrives on a white horse with an army to get what is rightfully his.

[@labsquadmedia176]

You said: "For 2000 years there's been no Kingdom of Heaven on offer. We only have the Kingdom of God - which is spirituality, not a literal actual kingdom " Incorrect. "Kingdom of Heaven" is how Matthew writes about it, "Kingdom of God" is Mark and Luke's preferred term to talk about the same thing. Just do a search of the word "basileia" in any online bible software (e.g. BibleHub) and the two terms are used in parallel parables and sayings in the various gospels. You said: "God doesn't think much of the day his Son was mocked, spat on and nailed to a chunk of wood." Incorrect: In Isaiah 5310, God is "pleased to crush" his servant, a pleasing aroma of propitiation. Jesus "For the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame" Hebrews 12:2. The Father deeply loves his rebellious human partners for "while they were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8) so that we could be brought into his family as "co-heirs with Christ" (Romans 8:17). The main theme of the Bible is the love of the Father in the Son who established the kingdom by is death and resurrection, to bring sin-sick humanity into a loving familial relationship with God: Colossians 1:25-28 25 Of this church I was made a minister according to the stewardship from God bestowed on me for your benefit, so that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God, 26that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints, 27to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. 28We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete in Christ "Kingdom" and "Salvation" are not at odds, they find delightful unity and relational expression in the person of the LORD Jesus the Christ, the Son of God who is "not ashamed to call us brothers."

[@CharlesDickens111]

@@labsquadmedia176 Kingdom of Heaven and God are not synonymous. How do I know? They're spelled different. Did Heaven die for your sins? Did Heaven create the heavens and the earth? They're different.

[@zwoterkorinther7194]

@@CharlesDickens111 Well that is not a good argument at all. To use a syntagmatic argument without any semantic context. It is like to argument with you, that your word heaven you are talking about is not the real heaven - it just means sky. If you get my point, you may see that every argument doesn't help for it is all ideology and claims of worldview. The aim is to understand the bible how it wants to be understood instead of putting your agenda onto it. Still your argumentation about the kingdom is interesting, but not really viewed from the biblical point of view.

[@CharlesDickens111]

@@zwoterkorinther7194 Your condescension knows no bounds.

[@jubrillasisi3599]

I wish this speaker was a CANAANITES or better still she is an Arab Palestinian under Isreal bombardment and apartheid system,she will then fully understand the language of war and genocide, utter rubbish

[@SSArcher11]

While the root of the word "genus" denotes "race", genocide doesn't strictly have to be limited to race. It can apply to a nation, ethnic group or faith, too. Also, God's identification of a tribe as exhibiting bad behavior doesn't change the fact that the entire tribe was targeted for extinction, whether all members were guilty or not. I agree, however, that extinctions by ancient Hebrews weren't truly genocidal. They were really motivated by security concerns. Also, surviving women and children of most battles were usually either converted or enslaved. And, that's not genocidal. That's merely self interest.

[@janradtke8318]

Oh what a nonsense. Doesn‘t she feel pain when she hears the stupid words coming out of her mouth?