Nations that were said to be the victims of Holy War and genocide rise from the dead in the first recorded resurrection on the pages of the Bible, demonstrating that much of what passes for history in the Bible is actually a kind of political propaganda and polemic, and that the Bible consists of source materials composed by different groups at different times, representing various ideological viewpoints.

      The Bible does not present a consistent picture of what is moral or what is right and what is wrong, as is demonstrated by the constant call for genocide on its pages. Old and young, men, women and infants, all were to be ruthlessly slaughtered, using the techniques of the day (a very messy affair. Use your imagination and try to picture what it would be like to hack an infant to death with the sword, or to chase down and hack to death a screaming grandmother). Holy War remained with us down through the ages, and in parts of the world it is still practiced, and it is not hard to identify the source of this fanaticism. Moslems were influenced by the Bible, and picked up on its call for 'Jihad'. I watched a documentary recently where Muslim fighters were launching shoulder held rockets and firing machine guns, each volley accompanied by a cry of 'God is Great'.

      One polemical excuse often employed to justify the vitriolic violence on the pages of the Bible is that, 'the Bible accurately portrays reality. The world is a violent place.' But 'portraying reality' and ascribing homicidal fury to God, even actively endorsing and promoting a genocidal, racist mindset are two very different things.

      The Bible actually portrays God in many different ways. For example one should either hate Moabites, and parcel out their land, or one should avoid all conflicts with Moabites and not attempt to take their land. Christ was given to say, 'put away your swords for those who live by the sword, will die by the sword.' And again he recommended that rather than resist, one should offer to carry the packs of the invading army. If they asked you carry their pack one mile, he recommended that it be carried two miles. And the Jewish prophets dreamed of the day when 'swords would be hammered into plough shares, and people would learn war no more.'

      The victims of genocide in the Bible do not remain in their graves, instead of rising repeatedly from the ashes, to deliver testimony to the actual political and ideological conflicts found on the pages of the Bible. The Bible is composed of multiple sources, and these sources represent different political and ideological viewpoints. An interesting example of what I mean can be found when we consider the ‘multiple massacres' of the Bible. As I indicated in the section on the book of Joshua, nations wiped out by Joshua make a miraculous resurrection from the dead in the book of Judges. They rise zombie like from the ashes to fight Israel again, and apparently nothing short of a silver bullet would suffice to put them down once and for all.

      This pattern is not confined to the books of Joshua and Judges. In the book of Numbers the Midianites are wiped out, only to reappear again and again in the works of history.

"They warred against Midian, as YAHWEH commanded Moses, and killed every male. They killed the kings of Midian ... And the people of Israel took captive the women of Midian and their little ones; and they took as booty all their cattle, their flocks, and all their goods. All their cities in the places where they dwelt, and all their encampments, they burned with fire." (Numbers 31:7)

"Moses was enraged with the officers of the army ... ‘So you spared the women! ... Kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has had sexual intercourse with a man, but keep the virgins for yourselves ... divide them up evenly.'" (Numbers 31:15)

The account in Joshua is agreement with this tradition recorded in Numbers.

"Moses defeated the leaders of Midian." (Joshua 13:21)

      It should come as no surprise that once again the book of Judges conflicts with the account in Joshua and also with the version of events in Numbers. The Midianites have been ‘raised from the dead.'

"The people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of YAHWEH; and YAHWEH gave them into the hands of the Midianites seven years ... because of the Midianites the people of Israel hid in caves and holes in the ground." (Judges 6:1)

      The Amalekites also showed an amazing ability to make a come back after being wiped out in a genocidal slaughter. The story begins with a reference to Amalek in the Exodus account, and a call for ‘holy war' and genocide.

"And Joshua mowed down Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword. And YAHWEH said to Moses, 'Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. A hand upon the banner of YAHWEH! YAHWEH will be at war with Amalek for all generations.'" (Exodus 17:13)

      The book of Deuteronomy picks up on this theme, and repeats the call for genocide.

"Remember what Amalek did to you on the way as you came out of Egypt ... Therefore when YAHWEH your God has given you rest from all your enemies round about, in the land which YAHWEH your God gives you for an inheritance to possess, you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; you shall not forget." (Deuteronomy 25:17)

And, so the story goes, they did not forget.

"Thus says YAHWEH of hosts, 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way, when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.'" And Saul came to the city of Amalek, and lay in wait in the valley. And Saul said to the Kenites, "Go, depart, go down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them." ... So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites. And Saul defeated the Amalekites ... and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword ... And Saul said to Samuel, "I have obeyed the voice of YAHWEH, I have gone on the mission on which YAHWEH sent me, I have brought Agag the king of Amalek , and I have utterly destroyed the Amalekites." (1 Samuel 15:2, 20)

      Samuel was furious because it turned out that Saul had spared one Amalekite, the king, and had also kept the livestock. After having been wiped out by Saul, the Amalekites, like the Amorites and so many nations before them (supposedly exterminated by Joshua), rise from the grave to fight David. Once again the Amalekites become the victims of genocidal slaughter.

"Now David and his men went up, and made raids upon the Geshurites, the Girzites, and the Amalekites ... And David smote the land, and left neither man nor woman alive, but took away the sheep, the oxen, the asses, the camels, and the garments, and came back to Achish ... And David saved neither man nor woman alive, to bring tidings to Gath, thinking, "Lest they should tell about us, and say, 'So David has done.'" Such was his custom all the while he dwelt in the country of the Philistines." (1 Samuel 27:8)

This is still not the last we have heard of the Amalekites.

"The Amalekites had made a raid upon the Negeb and upon Ziklag. They had overcome Ziklag, and burned it with fire, And David smote them from twilight until the evening of the next day." (1 Samuel 30:1)

      The book of Chronicles dispenses with the story of Saul's annihilation of the Amalekites, and instead agrees with the variant account in Samuel.

"These also King David dedicated to YAHWEH, together with the silver and gold which he had carried off from all the nations, from Edom, Moab, the Ammonites, the Philistines, and Amalek." (1 Chronicles 18:1)

      Either genocide is wrong or it is right, but it is not both wrong and right. Keep in mind that the most Biblically 'literal' of Christians are the ones who are the most insistent that 'morality is not based on circumstance, but rather on timeless truth.' This principle is ditched, however, when it comes to excusing wicked conduct endorsed by some Biblical character. White is white, unless it is black, in which case, biblically speaking, white is black. Now either genocide is right or wrong, and coming up with 'excuses based on circumstances' is unacceptable, in particular when believers deny the same argument to others, and condemn in others what they excuse on the pages of the Bible.

      It has been said by Deist critics of the Bible that the violence and vulgarity of so much that was written has brutalized and terrorized humanity for centuries. "I thoroughly detest it," Thomas Paine wrote, "just as I detest everything that is cruel." It is impossible to 'read through the Bible, cover to cover' without hearing about bloodshed and looking upon violent wickedness. As well, these genocidal scriptures are among the phoniest in the Bible, as the Bible itself testifies. Call it wish fulfillment, of the vilest sort, because these massacres never actually took place.

      Now it is common belief that "Joshua founded the nation of Israel on a pile of bloody corpses." The actual state of the Bible is somewhat different. There are five scenarios presented as the founding of Israel. (Consult the page on the book of Joshua for details.) The first, and for God only knows what reason, the most popular scenario (the only one you ever here preached from the loudest of pulpits) states that Joshua slaughtered the nations in a wholesale genocidal massacre, thus founding Israel. The second scenario, also found in the book of Joshua, states that Joshua attempted to slaughter all the nations, with mixed results. The third scenario, found in the book of Judges, states that Joshua made no attacks on the promised land, and that the first attacks came after his death. The fourth scenario, also found in Judges, states that God deliberately did not allow Joshua to conquer the land, both as a test of the loyalty of the Israelites, and so as to 'train future generations of Israelites in the art of warfare, that is, all those who had not learned it before.' And the fifth scenario, found in Exodus, states that they would not need to fight for the land for God would fight for them. God would send hornets (little by little) to drive the peoples out from the land. There are five scenarios which purport to describe the entrance into the promised land, and this implies five sources (not one). This is the actual state of affairs in the Bible, but, as I mentioned, for some horrible reason, the triumphant, slaughtering Joshua is the one everyone hears so much about, the one about whom songs are sung, and whose homicidal deeds are celebrated.

      Now as for founding a nation through slaughter, this was a practice roundly condemned by the prophets, and, unless we wish to believe that prophets were two faced hypocrites, this condemnation applies as much to this fictional Joshua character as it does to any other murderous tyrant, and indeed the prophet explicitly includes mention of the bloody policies of the leaders of Israel in his polemic, and it might as well be Joshua, the murderous builder of Jerusalem and Israel, who was sitting before the prophet as any other leader, since, apparently, their policies were the same.

"And I said, "Hear now, heads of Jacob And rulers of the house of Israel. Is it not for you to know justice? You who hate good and love evil, Who tear off their skin from them And their flesh from their bones ... the prophets lead my people astray; When they have something to bite with their teeth, They cry, "Peace," But against him who puts nothing in their mouths They declare holy war. On the other hand I am filled with power—With the Spirit of YAHWEH—And with justice and courage To make known to Jacob his rebellious act, Even to Israel his sin. Now hear this, heads of the house of Jacob And rulers of the house of Israel, Who abhor justice And twist everything that is straight, Who build Zion with bloodshed And Jerusalem with violent injustice ... Therefore, on account of you Zion will be plowed as a field, Jerusalem will become a heap of ruins, And the mountain of the temple will become high places of a forest. And it will come about in the last days That the mountain of the house of YAHWEH Will be established as the chief of the mountains. It will be raised above the hills, And the peoples will stream to it. Many nations will come and say, "Come and let us go up to the mountain of YAHWEH And to the house of the God of Jacob, That He may teach us about His ways And that we may walk in His paths." For from Zion will go forth the law, Even the word of YAHWEH from Jerusalem. And He will judge between many peoples And render decisions for mighty, distant nations. Then they will hammer their swords into plowshares And their spears into pruning hooks; Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they train for war. Each of them will sit under his vine And under his fig tree, With no one to make them afraid, For the mouth of YAHWEH of hosts has spoken." (Micah 3:1)

      The prophet Habakkuk wasn't any more impressed by the kind of genocidal war policies advocated in the Torah and (supposedly) put into faithful practice by Joshua. As he states in another section of his prophecy, 'as you have done to others, so it will be done to you,' which, you might recall, Joshua (Messiah) taught was the summation of (true) Law of God, and, he taught, it was the summation of the teachings of the prophets.

"Because you have looted many nations, All the remainder of the peoples will loot you—Because of human bloodshed and violence done to the land, To the town and all its inhabitants. Woe to him who builds a city with bloodshed And founds a town with violence! For the violence done to Lebanon will overwhelm you, And the devastation of its beasts by which you terrified them, Because of human bloodshed and violence done to the land, To the town and all its inhabitants." (Habakkuk 2:8, 12, 17)

"Behold, then, I smite My hand at your dishonest gain which you have acquired and at the bloodshed which is among you ... therefore as I live, declares YAHWEH GOD, I will give you over to bloodshed, and bloodshed will pursue you; since you have not hated bloodshed, therefore bloodshed will pursue you." (Ezekiel 22:13, 35:6)

"It will come about that he who is left in Zion and remains in Jerusalem will be called holy—everyone who is recorded for life in Jerusalem. When YAHWEH has washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion and purged the bloodshed of Jerusalem from her midst, by the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning, then YAHWEH will create over the whole area of Mount Zion and over her assemblies a cloud by day, even smoke, and the brightness of a flaming fire by night; for over all the glory will be a canopy. There will be a shelter to give shade from the heat by day, and refuge and protection from the storm and the rain. Let me sing now for my well-beloved A song of my beloved concerning His vineyard. My well-beloved had a vineyard on a fertile hill ... For the vineyard of YAHWEH of hosts is the house of Israel And the men of Judah His delightful plant. Thus He looked for justice, but behold, bloodshed ; For righteousness, but behold, a cry of distress ... For behold, YAHWEH is about to come out from His place To punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity; And the earth will reveal her bloodshed And will no longer cover her slain." (Isaiah 4:3, 5:7, 26:21)

      So the Bible advocates genocide and warfare but the prophets were also famous for protesting against genocide and warfare. (Note that this is not true of every prophet, since the books of the prophets also consist of edited source materials from different schools of thought. Consult the page on sources in the prophets for examples or the page on false prophets for examples of Holy War prophets. The books are inconsistent.) Some examples of the peace movement among the prophets and anti-war protests and protests against genocide follow...

Isaiah wrote:

"For YAHWEH’S indignation is against all the nations, And His wrath against all their armies; He has utterly destroyed them, He has given them over to slaughter." (Isaiah 34:2)

      In this scenario it is the armies themselves that are slaughtered, and not the civilians, not the infants, who are the objects of such homicidal fury on the pages of the Bible.

      Jeremiah delivered an explicit condemnation of the war policies found in the Torah, first condemning the Torah explicitly, and then vowing to bring their violent conduct back down on their heads (giving them a taste of their own medicine).

"My people do not know The ordinance of YAHWEH. How can you say, ‘We are wise, And the law of YAHWEH is with us’? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie. The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of YAHWEH, And what kind of wisdom do they have? Therefore I will give their wives to others, Their fields to new owners; Because from the least even to the greatest Everyone is greedy for gain; From the prophet even to the priest Everyone practices deceit. They heal the brokenness of the daughter of My people superficially, Saying, ‘Peace, peace,’ But there is no peace. Were they ashamed because of the abomination they had done? They certainly were not ashamed, And they did not know how to blush; Therefore they shall fall among those who fall; At the time of their punishment they shall be brought down, Says YAHWEH." (Jeremiah 8:7)

      The prophet Micah made a similar prophecy, and in this case blamed the offending law passages on the house of Ahab.

"You have kept the laws of Omri and all the deeds of the house of Ahab are observed; And in their devices you walk. Therefore I will give you up for destruction And your inhabitants for derision, And you will bear the reproach of My people. Woe is me! For I am Like the fruit pickers, like the grape gatherers. There is not a cluster of grapes to eat, Or a first-ripe fig which I crave. The godly person has perished from the land, And there is no upright person among men. All of them lie in wait for bloodshed." (Micah 6:16)

"Woe to those who drag iniquity with the cords of falsehood, And sin as if with cart ropes ... Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes And clever in their own sight." (Isaiah 5:18)

"He who walks righteously and speaks with sincerity, He who rejects unjust gain And shakes his hands so that they hold no bribe; He who stops his ears from hearing about bloodshed And shuts his eyes from looking upon evil." (Isaiah 33:15)

      The bible is a compilation of multiple sources representing multiple points of view. Christian theology is alleged to be ‘based on the Bible' but in actual practice it is based on selective quotations (and this makes selective nullification necessary - this practice best explains why there are hundreds of denominations and divisions in the church - the Bible is not consistent and this leads to inconsistent selection and differences in opinion concerning what should and should not be nullified, resulting in schisms and sectarianism). A good example of this practice of selection (accompanied by the required nullifications) can be uncovered when we consider how this heroically genocidal version of the Joshua character has been woven into Christian theology and finds expression in Christian practices and helps to shape Christian views of the world.

      Christ was not the messiah that Jews of the first century were expecting. They were expecting the appearance of a Joshua type character, a powerful military figure who would lead Israel in holy warfare resulting in swift world domination. Both Joshua of the Jewish Testament and the Messiah of the Church Testament were named ‘Joshua', but the ‘Joshua' of the first century disavowed temporal power and certainly was not the conquering military "Joshua" character described by Jewish eschatology of the day. It was said that for these reasons the Jewish people ‘missed the time of their visitation'. Now it would appear that by selecting Joshua, the genocidal war hero, and making the necessary nullifications of prophets and the first century Joshua (not to mention nullifying ordinary principles of common morality) many churches have repeated the same mistake.

      What have been called the ‘mainline' churches have been in steady decline over the course of the last century, and the dominant form of the Christian faith today is evangelical with a strong leaning towards fundamentalism and biblical literalism (note that this form of religion completely dominates the Christian airwaves and, as I have found by touring local churches, the majority of churches on the local level as well). Most ordinary believers think that they can relate the ‘history of Israel' and can relate the tale of Joshua's glorious (genocidal) conquest of the promised land, and they seem to be completely unaware of just how complex these traditions actually are. As a consequence of this process of nullification in combination with a strong conviction of ‘the inerrancy of divine scripture' this single version of the Joshua tale has woven itself into the very core of Christian eschatology.

      The influence of the prevailing image of Joshua displays itself in the warlike language and imagery that many Christians employ when describing evangelism. They speak of ‘taking the land' and ‘seizing your city for Christ' (read Joshua). They speak of the ‘eternally damned souls of India' with the people of India becoming proxies for the Canaanites, and thus in line for slaughtering by ‘Joshua' when he leads the Christian church in genocide against all the other peoples of the world. One can hardly imagine following any other leader who calls the troops up for world wide genocide, but this Christ figure has been amalgamated with this genocidal Joshua character of the Jewish Testament, and this world view has become entrenched in Christian eschatological thinking, and war like language and imagery have become part of the Christian lexicon as a result. Deeply ingrained prejudices are instilled and justified in the process as the ancient feuds and racist hostility of one particular group of sectarians in an ancient tribal society are dragged along by churches into the new millennium, shaping and forming the world view of believers.

      The deleterious results of this practice can be clearly seen in the bloody trail of corpses left by the church as it moved through ages. In this way the particular selections of scripture, and the process of nullification that must follow, can be understood in political terms. It is much easier to justify colonialism or Crusades or the destruction of dissidents (as heretics) if these particular passages of scripture are presented as the ‘authorized version of events'. These were 'Holy Wars'. God is a war god. These are the thoughts of God and as such, must become the thoughts of the believer.

      The same forces are at work today, although the bloody violence of the past has been sublimated. The bloody and violent language remains, and the bloodshed and genocide have simply been forestalled until the appearance of the Great Joshua and the time of the Great World Wide genocidal war of the churches finally comes. Until then believers can be mobilized for warfare in the political arena, supporting the agenda of the religious right, ‘taking the land', expelling Canaanites, and laboring to bring to power once again the same sort of Totalitarian Theocracy described in ancient books. The reasons then for the selective quotation and nullification of scripture can be seen to be motivated by political agendas, as they were in the ancient past when these polemics were first composed, and as they were throughout the history of the church.