Did God Order Genocide?

After a recent sermon, I received this question: We often tune into the Greenlake church service since our family attend there. I have a question about last Sabbaths sermon, if you don't mind. I thought I picked up that you do not think the God ordained mass killings in the Old Testament were ordered by God. Did I hear that right? If so how do you come to that conclusion? I appreciate any help you can give me on that.

It is a profound question. Here is my answer.

On one hand, the Bible clearly states God ordered the genocide.

Jericho and everything in it must be completely destroyed as an offering to the LORD. Only Rahab the prostitute and the others in her house will be spared, for she protected our spies. Joshua 6:17 NLT

And the LORD said unto Joshua, Fear not, neither be thou dismayed: take all the people of war with thee, and arise, go up to Ai: see, I have given into thy hand the king of Ai, and his people, and his city, and his land: And thou shalt do to Ai and her king as thou didst unto Jericho and her king: only the spoil thereof, and the cattle thereof, shall ye take for a prey unto yourselves: lay thee an ambush for the city behind it. Joshua 8:1-2 KJV

A “plain reading” of these Bible passages leaves us with a simple answer to the question, “Did God order the genocidal acts of Israel?” Yes. But, I counter, there are a number of other passages which Adventists (and many other Christians) “explain” in ways that avoid the plain meaning.

God hardened Pharoah's heart. Exodus 9:12

And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. 2 Samuel 24:1

Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee. 1 Kings 22:23

If we take the plain reading of the Bible in the above texts, God is an active participant in evil. So Advnetists (and others) have reinterpreted these texts in various ways to avoid saying that God actually did the very thing the Bible says God did. Since these statements are in the same historical context as the passages that say God ordered the genocide, I see no reason not to employ the same methods of interpretation. Which means we acknowledge the text says “God did it” or “God said it” but actually God did not do it or say it.

Some argue that moral revulsion to genocide is a purely modern thing, that if we had been back there in history, we would have had no problem with God ordering genocide. But the Bible itself includes strong protests against the notion of divinely-ordered or divinely-caused genocide. When God announced genocide against Sodom, Abraham protested such an act would be wrong for someone who had the title “Judge of All the Earth.” God bent to Abraham's protest and agreed the presence of even ten good people will be sufficient to prevent the divine blast. When the angels could not find ten good people, they evacuated the four “good” people, thus validating Abraham's fundamental instinct of objection to the slaughter of the innocent and guilty together—which is one of the inescapable effects of genocide.

When God explicitly ordered Moses to step aside and allow God to perpetrate genocide on Israel in the aftermath of the Golden Calf incident, Mosed refuses to step aside. And God backed down. Moses was  right and God was wrong. Or God as portrayed in the plain reading of the story. Usually this story is reinterpreted this way: God did not literally intend to annihilate Israel. Instead, God's words to Moses dramatized the evil the people had done and prepared the way for Moses to act as a savior, thus prefiguring the work of Jesus. I like this interpretation, but we must acknowledge it is a departure from the plain reading of the text. According to the text, God announces genocide and Moses adamantly protests and blocks the divine plan.

When we consider the genocide against the Canaanites, we note the divine pronouncement of doom was so well known the Canaanite peoples themselves knew of the decree. One group of Canaanites, the Gibeonites, tricked the Israelites into signing a mutual non-aggression treaty because of their familiarity with the divine order of genocide. Even though the divine decree was utterly clear, Joshua faced down his entire army when they insisted on obeying God and wiping out the Gibeonites. Joshua deliberately, forcefully opposed the divine verdict of doom. Curiously, when decades later, King Saul decided to do what Joshua had refused to do, God sided not with King Saul but with the Gibeonites. (See Joshua 9 and 10 and 2 Samuel 21.)

So when we say that genocide is immoral and unworthy of God, we are standing with Abraham, Moses and Joshua. Our opposition to genocide is not a modern invention. It is rooted in the most profound human sense of justice and righteousness.

Given the examples of Abraham, Moses, and Joshua, our own rejection of the idea that God really, truly ordered the annihilation of entire populations is on solid biblical grounds. We are insisting that the entirety of the Bible be brought into the discussion.

I argue that the opposition of these men to the command of God is the ancient writers' way of challenging the deeply-embedded conviction of their people that God condoned genocide. It seems to me there are at least a couple of plausible interpretations of the texts: Either God ordered genocide, then changed his mind when confronted by people more merciful than he was or God never actually intended to the genocide in the first place.

I prefer the second interpretation. I don't think God ever commanded genocide against the Canaanites.

Some people, explaining why the Canaanites needed to be annihilated, say that it was because the Canaanites were so debauched that they had to be eradicated to prevent the moral collapse of all humanity. There are problems with this idea.

First, and most important, when we come to the writings of the prophets we find them repeatedly challenging the notion that the Jewish people were superior to their neighbors.

As surely as I live, says the Sovereign LORD, Sodom and her daughters were never as wicked as you and your daughters. Sodom's sins were pride, gluttony, and laziness, while the poor and needy suffered outside her door. She was proud and committed detestable sins, so I wiped her out, as you have seen. "Even Samaria did not commit half your sins. You have done far more detestable things than your sisters ever did. They seem righteous compared to you. Shame on you! Your sins are so terrible that you make your sisters seem righteous, even virtuous. "But someday I will restore the fortunes of Sodom and Samaria, and I will restore you, too. Then you will be truly ashamed of everything you have done, for your sins make them feel good in comparison. Yes, your sisters, Sodom and Samaria, and all their people will be restored, and at that time you also will be restored. Ezekiel 16

A second point I would make is that if the purpose of the genocide was to eradicate the risk of spiritual contamination of Israel, that purpose utterly failed. The genocide was actually rather very limited. Only a few cities were annihilated but large swaths of the land were left in the control of the Canaanites. For example, Jerusalem remained in Canaanite hands until the time of David. (See the book of Joshua for details.) And through their early years, Israel was a raunchy, violent society. (See the book of Judges.)

I take as my principle text for understanding God, the three stories in Luke 15. In this chapter there is no hint of punishment or damnation. Instead, the first two stories end with all gathered in, one hundred sheep in the fold, ten coins back on the necklace. The last story ends with the Father's declaration to the older son, the one who is most persistently alienated from the generous heart of the Father: Son, all that I have is yours. Not will be, could be, or might be. But is.

This Father never ordered or condoned genocide. He never will.

Advocating Adventism: A Manifesto:

I am an Adventist advocate.

When I say I am an Adventist, I mean my family history and Adventist church history have been intertwined for generations. I'm also referencing my membership in this congregation, my education in Adventist schools, my employment as a pastor, and the habits of my life. All of this makes me Adventist, but it is not enough to make me an advocate. Being an advocate comes from my conviction that being Adventist is good for you. It is a superlative way of being human. It is this conviction—that you are better off being Adventist—that makes me an advocate, a promoter, a sales person, an evangelist. I think we have something so good everyone (or at least nearly everyone) would benefit from joining with us.

Many of the treasures of Adventism are shared treasures: God, the Bible, the Gospel, the Ten Commandments, baptism, the Lord's Prayer, the Golden Rule. These are common across Christianity. Our promotion of healthy habits and our critiques of meat, tobacco, and alcohol are shared with many non-Christians. Our extensive network of health care and educational institutions and our integrated global organization is reminiscent of the Catholic Church. Our prohibition of pork echoes the same prohibition in Judaism and Islam. Our Sabbath-keeping is a direct descendant of Jewish belief and practice.

So why be Adventist?

Sabbath-keeping is one reason. Being Adventist helps you keep Sabbath. And keeping Sabbath is a really valuable thing. There is a growing chorus of voices inside and outside Christianity lamenting the loss of Sabbath rhythm from our lives. Productivity, creativity, mastery are essential for the richest human life. But when they become unregulated drives, they become a cancer, displacing other human values like family, friendship, worship, play, wonder, compassion.

We have experienced the benefits of Sabbath-keeping in my own family. I'm a preacher. So, obviously, my professional duties interfere with the full Sabbath experience. Sabbath is my busiest, most intense day. Still, Sabbath practices—specifically the Friday night parties—comprise part of the glue that sticks our family together. Until the kids scattered, every Friday night we had haystacks or strawberry shortcake. We made music. We kept company together at the table set with our best dinnerware. Sometimes friends and neighbors joined us. We did this as part of our religion. It was not optional. It wasn't merely “a good idea.” Our Sabbath practices were central to our identity as an Adventist family.

Sabbath-keeping is nearly impossible to maintain apart from participation in a Sabbath-keeping community. Individuals or isolated families seldom manage to sustain a rich Sabbath-keeping experience. If you want the benefits of Sabbath-keeping, you will probably have to pay the cost of participating in a Sabbath-advocating church. And most Sabbath-keeping churches are Adventist.

Given the intensity and ubiquity of demands for 24/7 production and drive, Sabbath stands as a counter reality, a sweet, steady tradition that nourishes family, soul, and body. Our communal Sabbath-keeping provides access to the blessings of Sabbath even to those who lack the ordinary faith of Adventists. Our While those without faith don't enter as deeply into Sabbath rest as people with a sweet, devout faith, nevertheless, their participation in our community gives them a taste of Sabbath blessing. Even an atheist can keep Sabbath with us, and through that Sabbath-keeping experience soul-rest and a bit of the transcendent. Surely, even a mere taste of the transcendent is better than nothing at all. So be Adventist to sustain your own enjoyment of Sabbath and to join in stewarding this spiritual treasure for others.

A second treasure: Adventist theology provides resources for happily, confidently affirming the goodness of God. In contrast to much dark theology that pictures humans as repugnant to God, who condescends to pardon and save us in spite of our fundamental reality, Adventism highlights the Creation story. God delights in his human children (and the rest of creation as well). God's saving response to human failure and sin is exactly what one would expect of the divine creator parent. The human predicament is God's predicament. God is radically committed to human well-being just as any good parent would be. The crucifixion means at least this much: God would rather die than live without us.

God is loving. God is also lawful. God is bound by the constraints of morality. It is inconceivable that God would do evil or condone evil. If God appears to command or condone evil, humans are right to resist the divine word. Adventists have followed the Enlightenment rejection of divine right monarchy. The whim of the king is subordinate to the fundamental principles of law. This view of God has obvious implications for how we regard human authorities. When America was wrestling with the question of slavery, Adventists joined the abolitionists in rejecting centuries of Bible interpretation in favor of slavery. Slavery was immoral no matter what Abraham did or what customs were spelled out in the Levitical code. It was not possible for God to be on the side of slavery because God could not be a party to immorality. Period. This understanding of the divine character continues to serve as a guide for interpreting the Bible. It has obvious implications for responding to contemporary issues as well.

Adventists reject eternal torture in hell. Why? Because a moral, loving God could not do such a thing. Classic Christian theology was strongly influenced by elements of Greek philosophy. It was this philosophical background that allowed Christian theologians to say with a straight face that God created many humans for the express purpose of burning them in eternal hell fire. Christian theology rightly insists that God is loving and righteous. Adventism teaches that the words “loving” and “righteous” tell us something important about God. It is not possible for God (or anyone else) to be both righteous and a torture-master. Righteous authority cannot act in unrighteous ways. A government—heavenly or earthly—that practices torture loses its moral authority. If eternal torment were true, God would be an evil monster. We would not worship such a deity. So Adventists deny the notion of eternal hell fire. It is not possible. (Some of us—heretics—take this further. We deny hell fire all together.)

God is love. Among Adventists this is not one assertion among many. It is the supreme affirmation about God, an affirmation which serves as an interpretive filter or at least as a counter-balancing truth for all other theological assertions and interpretations of the Bible. The Adventist commitment to this truth is almost reason enough to claim your place among us.

Adventists are creationists. For many Adventists “creationism” has referred to the belief that all rock formations containing fossils were created 4000 years ago in Noah's Flood. However, for some of us “creationism” refers to the theological conviction that humans (and all of nature) are the creation of God. This means the “image of God” is found in the reality of humanity. God is expressed in both men and women. God is not exclusively or even preeminently male. The essential connection between God and humanity undergirds all the divine commands. Adventists understand the Bible's laws as descriptions of the character of God. Because humans are formed in the divine image, laws are also descriptions of the ideal human character. Laws which are good and necessary for humans also set limits on conceivable activity by God.

All the enduring commandments in the Bible are understood to be applications and developments of the character of God. Obviously life works better when people honor their parents, refrain from stealing, killing, cheating, lying. Adventist rules go beyond what is explicitly stated in the Bible. We discourage the use of tobacco, alcohol and other drugs—because life works better than way. We advocate a plant-based diet. We talk about exercise and sleep, about healthy habits for parenting and marriage. We are working to create a culture of forgiveness and grace. And a culture of disciplined, structured living. We are working to create this kind of culture because life works better this way. People are happier and healthier.

Creationism also means (at least for some of us) a high regard for nature. We promote direct engagement with nature through time spent in the out-of-doors (think Sabbath afternoon hikes and camping trips) and through science. We regard science as the structured scholarship of God's “Second Book.” We seek to pass on to our children a love of the world and a commitment to act as wise stewards of nature.

We are Jesus people. We open our hearts to the challenging words of Jesus that call us beyond revenge and retribution. We believe that through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, God has changed the world and painted the definitive vision of God's intentions for the future. In our worship and theology we celebrate the goodness of God. In our church culture we seek to support one another in the cultivation of patterns of living that nourish our relationships, our bodies, and our souls.

Our ambition, our aspiration is to be a people shaped by the life and words of Jesus, a community that interprets the Bible through the lens of an exalted vision of a loving God, a community that seeks to live out here in the real world the implications of that vision.

This is why I am an Adventist advocate. That is why I invite everyone to join us in this glorious quest.

(Note: If you know Adventism well, you will realize the “Adventism” I am promoting is a developmental Adventism. I am not advocating a fossil Adventism—an exact replica of the religino of the early Adventists. I do not imagine the Adventism of our ancestors is better than the Adventism of their children. Perhaps we should call this Adventism Five Point O. Or Third Adventism. Or Seattle Adventism. Whatever we call it, to me it's obvious that the seed of a religion is not better than its fruit. And it is this mature fruit of our faith that I advocate.)