Alex B. Lamoste Rev. Fr. Anthony Harold S.

Parilla

First Year College Professor of Biblical Theology

“Did Yahweh Promote Genocide?

The historical books of the Old Testament contains passages about the wholesale massacre
of the entire populations like the slaughter of women and children which seems to be commanded
or approved by God. In this matter, we need to understand and try to find some sort of rational
justification for Go’s behavior. Famous Northwest-Semitic inscription called “The Moabite Stone”
from the ninth century B.C., Mesha, the king of Moab gives of his treatment to Ataroth, a town of
Israel he had conquered. This king massacred the whole population as an offering of gratitude to
his God Chemosh. King Mesha is not only a semite, but his dialect is extremely close to biblical
Hebrew. Chemosh has relented Mesha important victories over all his enemies. In gratitude, Mesha
consecrated to destruction (or placed under the ban or anathema or caused to herem) the entire
people of Ataroth and Nebo. Among all the peoples of antiquity, war was being linked with
religion, at the command of the gods. Apparently universal among the early Semites. Three
passages which speak of the ban like Nm. 21:1-3, Dt.7:1-5, Jgs.1:17. The Bible often describe the
mass extermination of various populations as being ordered by God. Historical-critical approach
removes the scandal by a procedure where it appeals to the findings of the historical disciplines,
close analysis of the biblical text itself. First, supporters of this approach states that the ban never
happened and should not be the cause of the scandal. This leads to some objections. The second
approach is apologetical, this one is factual, that the ban should exist. This one comprises various
sub groups, albeit with some overlapping among them.

It seems that none of the interpretations about the ban is really satisfactory. They took the
statements of the biblical authors and of the biblical characters at face value. They assumed that
these statements referred to objective events taking place in history. God never commanded the
slaughter of thousands of defenseless women and innocent babies. But rather that his
representatives honestly convinced that the ban was pleasing to God, projected convictions in the
form of “God says” communication in which God is presented in ordering the ban. God-says texts
constitutes a distinct literary genre in the Bible and is not a figment of one’s imagination. God-
says seems to be a natural mode of expression and it is reflected in the still sophisticated religious
literature. The practice of the ban as we find in the Old Testament would today be condemned by
the Church as an intrinsically evil act. Any interpretation of the Bible which would attribute the
ban to a divine initiative would certainly fail in seeking a meaning a worthy of God. Many other
passages of the Bible present a God whose character is irreconcilable with a moral horror such as
the ban. God never ordered the ban, and therefore the scandal caused by this ancient institution in
Israel becomes groundless. A completely satisfactory solution to this problem about the ban is not
possible foe we do not yet possess a fully developed understanding about supernatural phenomena
called biblical inspiration. In his encyclical letter Providentissimus Deus of 1893, Pope Leo XIII
taught that the Bible contain errors in natural or scientific matters. The Bible can be found lacking
in scientific truth, historical truth, in religious truth.

Biblical scholars and theologians used to speak of the inerrancy of the Bible. What the Bible
contains is not only a revelation without error, but a truthful revelation. The truthfulness of
revelation is essentially that which aims at our salvation. What one must seek in the Bible are
matters concerning salvation, it is only from this angle that the veracity of God and the inerrancy
of the inspired writers are engaged (Tm. 3:15-17). In connection regarding the practice of the ban
is that the Old Testament teachings are certainly not consonant with God’s will, since God is
presumably consistent with himself and can hardly command mass murder at one time and
condemn it another time. If the Bible is seen in its totality, one will easily understand at the same
time that the biblical truth that shines through it is the truth that emenates from the totality of
revelation. And all the partial truths or even errors such as the view about the ban which is ordered
by God must be seen as mere steps in the gradual perception of the larger truth contained in the
completed whole.

The idea of “usableness or usefulness” is the key to address this problem. In Tm.3:16 told
us about the profitable character of inspired Scripture, an idea spelled out at Vatican II with its
reference to the truth for the sake of our salvation. Once we have understood that God never wanted
Israel slaughter entire populations, yet he nevertheless inspired sacred writers to include this
horrendous practice in their accounts of the history of Israel. A helpful use of this passages form a
stark reminder that he particular human beings God chose for his own people were not vey fined
or even civilized, they could be at times quite callously cruel. This covenantal relationship God-
Israel is very comforting for us incur relationship with God. We are too not particularly worthy of
his loving, yet God disregard.