The command to destroy the Canaanites. Deuteronomy 20 and Joshua 11

The passages

But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.

Deuteronomy 20:16-17

For it was of the LORD to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that he might destroy them utterly, and that they might have no favour.

Joshua 11:20

The problem

The command applies to the nations living in the promised land, not to cities farther away, which were to be offered terms of peace (Deuteronomy 20:10-15). The stated reason is to prevent Israel from learning idolatry. In Joshua, the Canaanites are described as hardened by God for the purpose of their destruction. Taken at face value, this describes a divinely commanded genocide. Many readers, believers and not, find that a serious moral problem.

What believers and scholars say

Rhetoric, not extermination. The same books that command total destruction say that the Canaanites remained (Judges 1, Joshua 15:63, 17:12-13). Copan, Younger and others argue that the language is the conventional language of ancient war reports. The command, on this reading, was to drive out or destroy the political and religious power structures, not every person.

Moral judgment on the Canaanites. Genesis 15:16 says the sin of the Amorites was "not yet full". The tradition holds that the conquest was a delayed judgment for child sacrifice and other practices. Critics reply that the evidence for Canaanite practices is mixed, and that the judgment seems out of proportion.

The text records a human view of God. Seibert, Jenkins and others hold that Israel's writers believed God had commanded the conquest, and that Christians need not agree. Some point to Jesus's reinterpretation of holy war in the sermon on the mount.

Jewish tradition. Rabbinic sources stressed the offer of peace in Deuteronomy 20 and held, in some cases, that the command could no longer be carried out because the ancient nations had been scattered and mixed.

Where this leaves it

Few passages are harder to read, and honest scholars across the spectrum say so. The options are limited: the text exaggerates, the command was just, or the writers misunderstood God. None of these is comfortable, and a reader who finds one unacceptable has to pick another. The Bible itself leaves the tension open.