Key OT Teachings

[GWH]

Your fixation on the Google definition doesn’t change the fact that my argument addressed the logic directly, because the issue isn’t the etymology of geno‑cide but whether your reasoning follows from the textual evidence, and on that point your accusation simply misses the argument I actually made.

I see no argument you made about:

What do you think about my second point, that because the whole Canaanite society was completely corrupt and children in those days were deemed to share the destiny of their parents, the genocide could be viewed as capital punishment that is justified in Rom. 13:1-5?

My third point was that the late OT (Ezekiel) and NT revealed children should not be punished for the sins of parents and conversion should be via peaceful persuasion rather than coercion, but capital crimes warrant capital consequences for adults.

We might also note that the genocide was never completed, which became a cause of temptation to worship Baal.

 

[OMC]

What do you think about my second point, that because the whole Canaanite society was completely corrupt and children in those days were deemed to share the destiny of their parents, the genocide could be viewed as capital punishment that is justified in Rom. 13:1-5?

You are trying to blend human government with direct divine judgment.
Romans 13 describes rulers bearing the sword within ordinary civic life.
Joshua describes God Himself executing a unique, unrepeatable act of judgment on a culture whose iniquity had reached its appointed fullness.

We might also note that the genocide was never completed, which became a cause of temptation to worship Baal.

We might also note that it was not a genocide but divine judgement, The flood in Noah’s day stands as a judgment on a world filled with violence; Sodom and Gomorrah reveal God’s response to cities whose wickedness cried out to heaven; Egypt’s plagues display God’s justice against oppression and idolatry; the destruction of the Canaanites shows God fulfilling a long‑declared sentence on a culture whose iniquity had reached its limit; and the exile of Israel itself demonstrates that even God’s covenant people are not exempt from His discipline when they persist in rebellion.

My third point was that the late OT (Ezekiel) and NT revealed children should not be punished for the sins of parents and conversion should be via peaceful persuasion rather than coercion, but capital crimes warrant capital consequences for adults

I see what Scripture actually declares: God was removing an entire culture whose corruption had become generational, systemic, and irredeemable, and the children were swept away in that corporate judgment, not in individual condemnation.

 

[GWH]

You are trying to blend human government with direct divine judgment.
Romans 13 describes rulers bearing the sword within ordinary civic life.
Joshua describes God Himself executing a unique, unrepeatable act of judgment on a culture whose iniquity had reached its appointed fullness.

We might also note that it was not a genocide but divine judgement, The flood in Noah’s day stands as a judgment on a world filled with violence; Sodom and Gomorrah reveal God’s response to cities whose wickedness cried out to heaven; Egypt’s plagues display God’s justice against oppression and idolatry; the destruction of the Canaanites shows God fulfilling a long‑declared sentence on a culture whose iniquity had reached its limit; and the exile of Israel itself demonstrates that even God’s covenant people are not exempt from His discipline when they persist in rebellion.

I see what Scripture actually declares: God was removing an entire culture whose corruption had become generational, systemic, and irredeemable, and the children were swept away in that corporate judgment, not in individual condemnation.

Yes, God typically works via human agency, including believers and politicians/governments.
Moses and Joshua were both for the Israelites, and Paul was the former who blended both in Rom. 13:1-5.
God's judgment per Josh. 6:17-21, 8:2, 10:28 & 11:20 included genocide (cf. Josh. 11:22, 15:63, 17:13, 24:20, Judg. 1:1,21,27&35) or
corporate judgment (children sharing their parent's fate/death), as it did for those who died in the flood in Noah's time,
and as it will on Judgment Day--the ultimate genocide of the human genome.

 

[OMC]

Yes, God typically works via human agency, including believers and politicians/governments.
Moses and Joshua were both for the Israelites, and Paul was the former who blended both in Rom. 13:1-5.
God's judgment per Josh. 6:17-21, 8:2, 10:28 & 11:20 included genocide (cf. Josh. 11:22, 15:63, 17:13, 24:20, Judg. 1:1,21,27&35) or
corporate judgment (children sharing their parent's fate/death), as it did for those who died in the flood in Noah's time,
and as it will on Judgment Day--the ultimate genocide of the human genome.

My friend, you are mixing together things Scripture keeps distinct: yes, God often works through human agency—including rulers, governments, and believers—but the judgments in Joshua were not “genocide” in the modern sense; they were one‑time covenant judgments on cultures whose iniquity had reached its full measure, and the text itself says God hardened them “that He might destroy them utterly” (Joshua 11:20), meaning the agent was God, not Israel’s ethnic hostility; likewise, the flood was not “corporate guilt” but corporate corruption, because Genesis 6 says “all flesh had corrupted his way,” and the children who died did not die as guilty individuals but as part of a culture under divine judgment—just as in the final judgment, Christ will remove the wicked from among the righteous (Matthew 13:41–43), not annihilate the “human genome,” but judge moral rebellion; so your categories need tightening: God’s judgments in Scripture are never ethnic cleansing, never political genocide, never human‑driven extermination—they are divine acts of justice on cultures whose corruption has become total, and they cannot be used to justify modern violence or political ideology.

 

[GWH]

My friend, you are mixing together things Scripture keeps distinct: yes, God often works through human agency—including rulers, governments, and believers—but the judgments in Joshua were not “genocide” in the modern sense; they were one‑time covenant judgments on cultures whose iniquity had reached its full measure, and the text itself says God hardened them “that He might destroy them utterly” (Joshua 11:20), meaning the agent was God, not Israel’s ethnic hostility; likewise, the flood was not “corporate guilt” but corporate corruption, because Genesis 6 says “all flesh had corrupted his way,” and the children who died did not die as guilty individuals but as part of a culture under divine judgment—just as in the final judgment, Christ will remove the wicked from among the righteous (Matthew 13:41–43), not annihilate the “human genome,” but judge moral rebellion; so your categories need tightening: God’s judgments in Scripture are never ethnic cleansing, never political genocide, never human‑driven extermination—they are divine acts of justice on cultures whose corruption has become total, and they cannot be used to justify modern violence or political ideology.

I do not understand why you are unwilling to view wiping out everyone as "genocide",
although I agree that referring to it as "judgment" or "just" does stress that it was good/necessary.

I think we agree that the judgment/genocide was just/good because the sin of the Canaanites was "capital",
and the punishment had to be corporate.

You have not yet addressed my third point: the late OT (Ezekiel) and NT revealed children should not be punished for the sins of parents and conversion should be via peaceful persuasion rather than coercion, but capital crimes warrant capital consequences for adults.

Nor have you noted that the genocide/judgment was never completed, which became a cause of temptation to worship Baal
(cf. Josh. 11:22, 15:63, 17:13, 24:20, Judg. 1:1,21,27&35).

 

[OMC]

I do not understand why you are unwilling to view wiping out everyone as "genocide",
although I agree that referring to it as "judgment" or "just" does stress that it was good/necessary.

Genocide targets identity, not geography, not behavior, and not covenant violation. That's why I don't agree.

You have not yet addressed my third point: the late OT (Ezekiel) and NT revealed children should not be punished for the sins of parents and conversion should be via peaceful persuasion rather than coercion, but capital crimes warrant capital consequences for adults

The whole issue resolves cleanly once you keep the three biblical lanes distinct:
Ezekiel 18 teaches that children are not judged for the sins of their parents—that is individual moral accountability; the New Testament teaches that conversion is by proclamation, persuasion, and the Spirit’s drawing, never coercion—faith cannot be forced because it is a voluntary response to truth; and the whole canon affirms that adults who commit capital crimes face capital consequences under legitimate magistrates (Genesis 9:6; Romans 13:4)—that is civil justice, not religious compulsion; when you keep those categories separate, there is no contradiction and no tension: children are protected from inherited guilt, unbelievers are invited rather than compelled, and evildoers are punished for deeds, not beliefs, which means later revelation does not overturn earlier covenant judgments but clarifies how individual responsibility, gospel persuasion, and civil authority operate in their proper spheres.

Nor have you noted that the genocide/judgment was never completed, which became a cause of temptation to worship Baal
(cf. Josh. 11:22, 15:63, 17:13, 24:20, Judg. 1:1,21,27&35).

You are right to note that the judgment was never completed, and Scripture itself repeatedly highlights that fact: Joshua 11:22, 15:63, 17:13, 24:20, and Judges 1:1, 21, 27, 35 all testify that Israel left pockets of Canaanite presence, and those pockets became ongoing sources of temptation, idolatry, and covenant infidelity. But this incompleteness does not turn the conquest into genocide; it proves the opposite. Genocide requires intent to destroy a people as such, whereas the biblical record shows Israel neither completed nor sustained such an intent — the judgment was covenantal, judicial, and limited, not ethnic. God’s command was not “destroy this race,” but “judge this culture whose iniquity is full,” and Israel’s failure to carry out that judgment fully resulted not in ethnic elimination but in continued coexistence, intermarriage, syncretism, and Baal worship. The very texts you cite demonstrate that the conquest was not genocide, because genocide does not fail, does not leave survivors, does not coexist, and does not produce centuries of mixed populations; instead, the biblical narrative shows partial judgment, partial obedience, and long-term spiritual compromise, all of which align with covenant justice, not ethnic extermination.

 

[GWH]

Genocide targets identity, not geography, not behavior, and not covenant violation. That's why I don't agree.

The whole issue resolves cleanly once you keep the three biblical lanes distinct:
Ezekiel 18 teaches that children are not judged for the sins of their parents—that is individual moral accountability; the New Testament teaches that conversion is by proclamation, persuasion, and the Spirit’s drawing, never coercion—faith cannot be forced because it is a voluntary response to truth; and the whole canon affirms that adults who commit capital crimes face capital consequences under legitimate magistrates (Genesis 9:6; Romans 13:4)—that is civil justice, not religious compulsion; when you keep those categories separate, there is no contradiction and no tension: children are protected from inherited guilt, unbelievers are invited rather than compelled, and evildoers are punished for deeds, not beliefs, which means later revelation does not overturn earlier covenant judgments but clarifies how individual responsibility, gospel persuasion, and civil authority operate in their proper spheres.

You are right to note that the judgment was never completed, and Scripture itself repeatedly highlights that fact: Joshua 11:22, 15:63, 17:13, 24:20, and Judges 1:1, 21, 27, 35 all testify that Israel left pockets of Canaanite presence, and those pockets became ongoing sources of temptation, idolatry, and covenant infidelity. But this incompleteness does not turn the conquest into genocide; it proves the opposite. Genocide requires intent to destroy a people as such, whereas the biblical record shows Israel neither completed nor sustained such an intent — the judgment was covenantal, judicial, and limited, not ethnic. God’s command was not “destroy this race,” but “judge this culture whose iniquity is full,” and Israel’s failure to carry out that judgment fully resulted not in ethnic elimination but in continued coexistence, intermarriage, syncretism, and Baal worship. The very texts you cite demonstrate that the conquest was not genocide, because genocide does not fail, does not leave survivors, does not coexist, and does not produce centuries of mixed populations; instead, the biblical narrative shows partial judgment, partial obedience, and long-term spiritual compromise, all of which align with covenant justice, not ethnic extermination.

Targeting identity would be identicide.

Per corporate punishment the Canaanite children were killed because of their parents' idolatry,
which involved both belief and practice. but they would not deserve going to hell with them.

Yes, and some of those verses state the Canaanites who were not killed became slaves,
which confirms the first reason I cited about the Gibeonites subterfuge.

How many pastors do you think teach their congregations this rebuttal to the charge of atheists that God per the OT is demonic?

 

[OMC]

How many pastors do you think teach their congregations this rebuttal to the charge of atheists that God per the OT is demonic?

Few pastors offer a solid, text-based response to the atheist claim that “the God of the Old Testament is demonic.” It’s not because the Bible lacks answers—it has plenty—but because many pastors don’t teach the Old Testament with the kind of precision, historical insight, and covenant clarity needed to counter that argument.
Too often, pulpits skip over the tough passages, tone down the stark realities of divine justice, and rely on emotional appeals instead of careful exegesis. As a result, when atheists bring up the charge, congregations are usually unprepared, and pastors tend to fall back on tired clichés.

 

[GWH]

Few pastors offer a solid, text-based response to the atheist claim that “the God of the Old Testament is demonic.” It’s not because the Bible lacks answers—it has plenty—but because many pastors don’t teach the Old Testament with the kind of precision, historical insight, and covenant clarity needed to counter that argument.
Too often, pulpits skip over the tough passages, tone down the stark realities of divine justice, and rely on emotional appeals instead of careful exegesis. As a result, when atheists bring up the charge, congregations are usually unprepared, and pastors tend to fall back on tired clichés.

Yep. My pastor preached the Gospel most Sundays during my childhood and as a result I was unprepared to face atheism,
which prompted me as a teen to search Scripture for answers and motivated my ministry as an older adult truthseeker.

 

[GWH]

Exo. 3:6. “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” Jesus cited this verse as evidence of the resurrection, indicating the power of God to make people be like angels in heaven (Matt. 22:29-32).

When Moses was called by God, he asked God to reveal His name, and God’s answer is our next key teaching.

Exo. 3:14. God is “I AM” or the source of being/existence.

Thousands of years later Rene Descartes (d.1650) became famous for saying, “cogito ergo sum” (“I think, therefore I am”), which expresses the fact that our own self-consciousness is the only truth that we know with certainty. Otherwise we walk by faith
regarding ultimate reality and even scientific theories or mathematical axioms. We think we are; I AM is God. (2Cor. 5:7)

Continuing the list of key OT passages:

Exo. 12:1-11, 23, 43-51, 13:3-16. The Passover was instituted by Moses for the purpose of commemorating the night that the Lord killed every firstborn Egyptian person, which was the 10th plague that prompted Pharaoh finally to let the Israelites leave the country.

In Matt. 26:2 Jesus said the Son of Man would be crucified on the Passover, which apparently occurred on a Friday that year (per Matt. 28:1). Christ’s crucifixion fulfilled the purpose of the Passover (per Rom. 3:21-5:1) and was commemorated by the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26:26-28, 1Cor. 11:23-26).

After Moses led the Exodus, he received the Ten Commandments from God, which for our purposes we will consider as one key teaching.

Exo. 20:1-17. God requires moral perfection (cf. Deut. 5:6-21). Of course each of the Ten Commandments is important, and Jesus affirmed many of them in the “Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:21-48). However, the NT does not reaffirm the Sabbath Law for Christians, just as it did not continue requiring physical circumcision (cf. Heb. 7:11-10:1).

 

[ScooterJackson]

Is it really compatible?

https://answersingenesis.org/big-bang/

Yeah, God said Light Be and BAM, there was light!

 

[GWH]

Yeah, God said Light Be and BAM, there was light!

Yes, and God is Light/Logos.

 

[ScooterJackson]

Yes, and God is Light/Logos.

Yes, God said Light Be and BAM, there was light!

That was the big bang they be talking about

 

[GWH]

Continuing the list of key OT passages:

Exo. 12:1-11, 23, 43-51, 13:3-16. The Passover was instituted by Moses for the purpose of commemorating the night that the Lord killed every firstborn Egyptian person, which was the 10th plague that prompted Pharaoh finally to let the Israelites leave the country.

In Matt. 26:2 Jesus said the Son of Man would be crucified on the Passover, which apparently occurred on a Friday that year (per Matt. 28:1). Christ’s crucifixion fulfilled the purpose of the Passover (per Rom. 3:21-5:1) and was commemorated by the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26:26-28, 1Cor. 11:23-26).

After Moses led the Exodus, he received the Ten Commandments from God, which for our purposes we will consider as one key teaching.

Exo. 20:1-17. God requires moral perfection (cf. Deut. 5:6-21). Of course each of the Ten Commandments is important, and Jesus affirmed many of them in the “Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:21-48). However, the NT does not reaffirm the Sabbath Law for Christians, just as it did not continue requiring physical circumcision (cf. Heb. 7:11-10:1).

Exo. 20:12 (= Deut. 5:18). “Honor your father and mother, so that you may live long in the land God is giving you.”

Jesus referred to this commandment and the death penalty for cursing parents (per Exo. 21:17, Lev. 20:9) in Matt. 15:3-6,
reproving the Pharisees for nullifying it by their tradition of deeming it to be satisfied when they devoted offerings to God.
Paul noted (in Eph. 6:2-3) that this commandment was the first one with a promise–long life on earth.

This commandment may be viewed as teaching the importance of familial love and values and also of the family institution as the foundation of stable society and government. Living long in the land can be viewed as signifying being saved when children have the same faith in God as their parents. Not honoring and adopting one’s parents’ faith in God results in being sinful and prodigal.

 

[ScooterJackson]

Not honoring and adopting one’s parents’ faith in God results in being sinful and prodigal.

Unless of course one's parents follow false doctrine.

In that case it would be sinful to follow their faith

 

[GWH]

Exo. 21:24 (= Lev. 24:20 & Deut. 19:21). In cases of serious physical injury, although it would be technically just for the same injury to be done to the perpetrator, Jesus indicated that it would be better to apply the principle of trying to avoid/prevent crime by such tactics as settling arguments out of court (Matt. 5:25), being shrewd (Matt. 10:16), and not quarrelling (cf. Pro. 15:1).

The key point is that all commandments teach us to cooperate with the Lawgiver, whose moral will was not ended or rescinded by the death of Messiah. There are additional moral precepts, such as those found in Exo. 21, 22 & Lev. 18-20, but most of the other Mosaic commands are either part of the sacrificial system or instructions for treating various health problems.