Mass Killings in the Bible

It can’t be justified, no matter how Christians spin it

First, let’s read a few passages from the Holy Bible that talk about how God orders His people to commit mass killing when they go into the promised land. If you don’t know about these accounts in the Old Testament, this can be an eye-opener.

(Non-members can read this article for free here)

… in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them — the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites — as the Lord your God has commanded you. (Deuteronomy 20:16–17)

Let’s see how Joshua carries out this command when he leads the Israelites to conquer the city of Jericho.

They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it — men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys … So the Lord was with Joshua, and his fame spread throughout the land. (Joshua 6:21, 27)

Even after the Israelites settle down in Canaan, the command of mass killing continues.

This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ (1 Samuel 15:2–3)

God commits mass killings in the Bible. It’s not something Christians like to talk about, but as long as they still believe in the doctrine of biblical inspiration and preach to their neighbors that their Bible is authoritative and should be obeyed, they have to deal with this problem.

I respect people exercising their freedom of religion, but it makes my heart cringe when I know many Christians would defend such horrendous deeds with a straight face. It leaves a weak spot in their mind that could be manipulated to make them commit atrocities while thinking they are doing something positive.

In this article, I discuss some of the justifications Christians give to rationalize the mass killings recorded in the Old Testament.

It was meant to eradicate evil

One form of rationalization is to claim that those Canaanites were so evil that they must be eradicated. This means that even their babies and children must be killed.

… destroying the Caananites who burned their children to death in sacrifice to their made up gods, their idols amongst other evils that were intregal to their “culture.” So, yes, that mass killing I would consider “good.” — D L Henderson, May 4, 2023

We are talking about human beings, not weeds in the backyard. But the way this argument is presented gives an impression that human lives are insignificant, so it does not take that much to justify killing them.

Nazis committed Holocaust, but would Christians say it is just and moral to kill every last one of them, including their children and babies? Isn’t that exactly what Nazis did that made them so evil in the first place?

What exactly did Canaanites do anyway? Most Christians, like the quote I give above, would say they sacrificed their children to their gods. But such practices were not unthinkable at that time. Even Abraham did not find it strange that his God would ask him to kill and sacrifice his son Isaac.

Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love — Isaac — and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.” (Genesis 22:2)

Abraham’s willingness to kill his son as a sacrifice to God is still celebrated by modern Christians. If Canaanites were abhorrently evil because they thought child sacrifice was what their deities required, what about Abraham, who also thought the same thing, prepared to carry out the sacrifice and did not even try bargaining with God?

Furthermore, in 1 Samuel 15, which I quote above, sacrificing children is not the reason given for the command of mass killing. That passage states it clearly: the Amalekites ambushed the Israelites previously. Does that make Amalekites deserve total annihilation, including all of their non-combatants?

By the way, is mass killing the only way God deals with evil He cannot tolerate? How about patient education? Surely an omnipotent and omniscient God could come up with better solutions than resorting to mass killing. Right?

No? He CANNOT?

Consequences of sinful deeds can affect other people

Christians often say that sins affect innocent people, like an innocent person being killed by a murderer. In the case of mass killing in the Old Testament, some Christians acknowledge that Canaanite children were innocent, but they were killed because of their parents’ sins.

This argument suffers from a category mistake. It’s true that sins can negatively affect innocent people, but the mass killing I discuss in this article is not portrayed as a sinful action, but a judicial punishment.

A punishment imposed on innocent people is not uncommon historically. It’s called collective punishment. But for obvious reasons, such a form of punishment is not practiced in most countries today, except in some totalitarian regimes.

Even if Christians want to go through mental gymnastics to claim that collective punishment, if initiated by God, is moral and just, they don’t have support from the Old Testament itself. One of the laws that God give to Israel is this:

Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin. (Deut. 24:16)

Do Christians want to re-interpret that verse so it does not really mean what it says literally?

Only God is qualified to define what is good or moral

Many Christians claim that morality and goodness originate from God; therefore, everything God does is, by definition, good and moral. We don’t like what happens in the Old Testament because of our fallen nature and imperfect moral sense. We should not judge God’s deeds by our standards. If we align our moral standards to God’s, we would say the mass killing commanded by God is good and moral.

My next question is: should the moral standard that justified the mass killing of Canaanite babies and children be implemented in today’s society?

According to a Christian writer on Medium, the answer is yes.

Well, at least he is consistent…

But why? Why would someone wish that mass killing be installed into our justice system as a legal form of punishment?

Because if God commanded it, it must be objectively moral?

Guess what? Mass killing in tribal conflict was common practice in ancient times. There is nothing objectively moral about mass killing. It was a subjective moral standard that ancient people adopted! It’s sad that many Christians today are still defending the practices and values of ancient people when human civilization had already moved on.

Which is more probable? 1. Ancient people happened to hold moral codes that align with the objective moral standards of the Creator of the Universe, which we should follow in modern times. Or 2. The author of the Old Testament invented a God that matched their understanding of morality.

If Christians insist that option 1 is the correct one, using that kind of reasoning, it seems nothing would be immoral as long as God commands it. If God had commanded Israelites to rape Canaanite underage girls and boys, or roast their corpses and consume them, many Christians would still find ways to make it sound acceptable and moral.

I can hear Christians complain that such devilish actions are not part of God’s commands in the Old Testament. Of course. I know that. But let me ask this: Suppose the Old Testament does say that God commands Israelites to rape Canaanite children, would you condemn it? Would you then be willing to say that the God who gives this kind of order is immoral?

I hope you hesitated and stopped to think. At least that would tell me your inner moral compass has not been completely snuffed out by indoctrination.

Appeal to original sin

A common argument raised by Christians to defend the mass killing in the Bible is to appeal to the original sin. This argument states that since people are born as sinners, it is justifiable for God to kill children and babies. In other words, there are no innocent people. All deserve to die a violent death. But God is merciful, so He spares some people from that punishment.

There are so many problems with this argument.

First and foremost, original sin is NEVER stated as the reason for the slaughter of Canaanites or Amalekites in the Bible. Christians just make it up in order to justify this inhumane behavior.

Second, if all deserve to die, but God spares some but not others, then this God is unfair. Some children happened to be born in Canaanite households, so God killed them for their original sin; some happened to be born in Israelite households, so God blessed them. Does that sound like an objective moral standard to you?

Third, the doctrine of original sin is unbiblical in the first place. This needs to be addressed separately. For the sake of this article, I simply refer readers to this article.

Jesus came to offer salvation

This is one of the weakest arguments I have seen. But, surprisingly, I know a few prominent theologians who use this argument and don’t see any problems with it.

This argument roughly goes like this: Old Testament shows us the horrendous effects of human sin and the tragic results of what a just God had to do with sinners, i.e., killing them off. But Jesus offered Himself as the ultimate redemption of sin, so whoever believes in Him does not need to experience the horror of God’s judgment.

The major problem with this argument is the avoidance of the moral issue associated with mass killing in the Old Testament. If it was right, one should argue for it. If it was wrong, then appealing to Jesus would not make it right. To say that mass killing is OK because, in the end, God makes everything right is a non sequitur fallacy.

Furthermore, appealing to this argument is an indirect admission that what happened in the Old Testament period was somehow bad, so it had to be mended.

It did not happen after all

Some Christians attempt to dismiss the whole genocide thing by saying that, historically, Israelites did not really kill all of the Canaanites.

My question is: So it was right for Israelites to not follow God’s commands?

Some Christians say that the description in the Bible is a form of hyperbole. God did not really mean non-combatants should be killed as well. But if that was the case, why would God chastise Israelites for not carrying out his command fully (Judges 2:1–2)?

Furthermore, even if mass killing did not happen historically, Christians still need to explain what is the point of the divine command to kill women and children living in Canaan. If I say I sexually harassed my subordinate in the workplace yesterday, and then I say it is just a joke, would it be alright then? A bad joke is still bad. It does not suddenly become OK when you claim it is not literally true.

In all fairness, I agree that the mass killing of Canaanites did not happen historically (there is no archaeological evidence). I also agree that the description of utter annihilation is hyperbole. The next question is: Why make such an exaggeration if it did not happen after all? It was because that’s how ancient people showed the greatness of their tribal deity. They considered the ability to annihilate enemy armies a great demonstration of the prowess of their gods.

Ancient Israelites were no different. One consistent motif throughout the Old Testament is Yahweh’s military capability. Hence, even if mass killing did not historically happen, it makes sense that ancient Israelites would make it up, if only to persuade their own people to continue fearing their God Yahweh.

Takeaway

As shown above, most Christians feel the need to justify God’s atrocious deeds in the Bible. They claim that we should not trust our own moral judgment, but should accept whatever God says or does as good. In doing so, they set themselves up to fall into the deep abyss of moral confusion. No longer being able to determine what is right or wrong, the only thing holding them back from doing evil is, ironically, their own moral intuition.

Cognitive dissonance among Christians is a real thing. They believe God is absolutely moral, but they are confronted with the fact that this God committed mass killing. There are two ways this cognitive dissonance can be solved. 1. Admit that the Bible is not to be trusted after all. 2. Do heavy mental gymnastics to justify mass killing as morally acceptable.

I am glad I chose the first option.

If you are not a Medium member yet, please consider signing up using my referral link. I will get a small commission at no extra cost to you.