The morality of the book of Joshua

Helen Willis hhiwater@BRIGHT.NET
Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:29:23 -0700 (00893719763, 3544CE82.6DBE@bright.net) 

jepler@inetnebr.com wrote:

> 

> > IAN S.

> > First Helen, for at least one of your issues, in order to really

> > understand what a Biblicist would believe or how they would respond,

> > it is very important to first completely understand the nature of God

> > as taught by them.  I have quite often seen a term used in this list

> > to describe one of God's attributes, and to be quite honest with you,

> > have never heard any Christian use it, and I feel that it is a false

> > representation of what God is, to many.  The term is

> > 'omnibenevolent'.  I challenge anyone to find that description,

> > attributed to God in any Christian creed, catechism, or confession of

> > faith.  It simply does not exist.  God is described as many things,

> > but omnibenevolent is not one of them.

> >

> On Wed, Apr 15, 1998 at 03:12:29PM -0700, Helen Willis wrote:

> > I presume that this is in reply to my question about the morality of the

> > book of Joshua. I did not accuse you of claiming God was

> > 'omnibenevolent'. However, you do believe He is basically a moral God

> > don't you?

> > Helen

> > hhiwater@bright.net

> >

> 

> But it seems to me that theists are stuck with either "benevolence is

> not a positive attribute" or "God is maximally benevolent", so long as

> they define God as "that which has maximally all positive attributes".  Of

> course, it could be that "maximally belevolent" is not equivalent to

> "omnibenevolent", or that Christians reject the definition of God as "that

> which has maximally all positive attributes"... On the other hand, would

> they accept that another being could be more benevolent than God?

> 

> Maybe Christians don't say it out loud, "God is omnibenevolent", but it

> seems to me to follow from the conception of God that I understand

> Christians to have.

> 

HELEN:
It take so long just to dump Dick, and because I have a life away from
the list I have not gotten back to several post for over a week I
apologize for my tardiness on this one. I was not talking about
"omnibenevolent" here. Some quotes:

  Joshua 6:21-Then they devoted to the destruction of the city
(Jericho), both men and   women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and
donkeys. 

after tricking all the men of Ai into following them into wilderness
  Joshua 8:24-27 When Israel had finished slaughtering all the
inhabitants of Ai in the   open wilderness where they pursued them, and
when the very last of them had fallen by   the edge of the sword, all
Israel returned to Ai, and attacked it with the edge of the   sword. The
total of those who fell that day, both men and women, was twelve    
thousand-all the inhabitants of Ai. For Joshua did not draw back his
hand, with which   he stretched out the sword, until he had utterly
destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai.   Only the livestock and the spoil
of that city Israel took as their booty, according to   the word of the
Lord that he had issued to Joshua.

  Joshua 10:28 Joshua took Makkedah on the day, and struck it and its
king with the edge   of the sword; he utterly destroyed every person in
it; he left no one remaining.

  Joshua 10:29 Then Joshua passed on from Makkedah, and all Israel with
him, to Libnah,   and fought against Libnah. The Lord gave it also and
its king into the hand of Israel;   and he struck it with the edge of
the sword, and every person in it; he left no one     remaining in
it;....

  Joshua 10:32 The Lord gave Lachish into the hand of Israel, and he
took it on the     second day, and struck it with the edge of the sword,
and every person in it......

Then we have Gezer, Eglon, Hebron, Debir, Negeb,  and we are told
(10:40)"...he left no one remaining, but utterly destroyed all that
breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded."

Now, here's my questions. The world is about to try some folks from the
former Yugoslavia for war crimes; specifically for something these folks
called, "ethnic cleansing". Do you believe that these guys from
Yugoslavia should be tried? Should Po Pot be called a criminal for what
he did? Should the Nazis be loathed for what they did? Why? 
Helen
hhiwater@bright.net