Spiritual Continuity

This was the final essay in the book; the last hope in the book for resolution.

The author suggests that the canaanite warfare is the first step in a symbol of God's warfare against sin and evil. That war continues to be waged in the New Testament in a spiritual fashion (e.g. 'our war is not with flesh and blood, but with spiritualities...') and is finalized in the End Times when God once again is a warrior and defeats his enemies once and for all.

That is the short version. The author seems to deal with seeming disparity of "the warrior God of the OT" and the "pacifist God in Jesus" by suggesting that the central theme of scripture is rather God's warrior conquest (he makes Jesus into Warrior Jesus rather than Meek Pacifist Jesus) than Christ's love, acceptance, forgiveness and mercy.

The author does not spend much time addressing the moral or ethical implications of having God condone (even mandate) the slaughter of men, women, and children...except to say that all people are wicked and they deserved it, even the children. He then employs a familiar switcheroo that I am beginning to really dislike. The argument is this: "the question should not be Why did God not save some (i.e. the Canaanites)? because all are wicked and sinful and deserving of death...but rather, the astonishment is that God has chosen to save any (i.e. the Israelites)." Truly we should marvel at God's passion and willingness to pursue salvation, but to reframe the question thus really dodges the issue at heart. My basic concern with this is not only the moral implication of choosing to save one person over another when there is the implicit ability to save both, but also the very stark issue that Jesus himself implies passionate intent and desire to save everyone! If Jesus wants us to love everyone, if he says that he "desires that none should perish", then why oh why would he neglect to save someone who he has the power and intent to save?

To me, it is to abandon the Bible to say either: 1. The OT was wrong when it said that God commanded genocide (as the first author suggests), or 2. The NT was wrong when Jesus said he wanted to save everyone. Is this an impossible contradiction? In the final two pages of this book, a reviewer of this final author stated that in the end it is impossible to know the reasons God does what he does. And to him, that is the best answer that the millenia of the people of God can produce.