How Can a Holy, Righteous, and Loving God Be Justified in the Destruction of Men, Women, and Children?

Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All

$5.00

A Biblical Examination of Joshua 6:21; Deuteronomy 2:34; 3:6 in Light of Divine Justice and Foreknowledge

The command given to Israel to annihilate entire populations, including women and children, in cities such as Jericho, Heshbon, and Bashan (Joshua 6:21; Deuteronomy 2:34; 3:6), poses a deep theological question: how can such acts be reconciled with the character of a holy, righteous, loving, and all-powerful God? This issue is not to be approached with sentimentality or speculation, but by using the rigorous discipline of the historical-grammatical method and maintaining fidelity to the infallible, inspired Word of God.

The Canaanites: A Culture Fully Ripened in Iniquity

The Canaanite nations had reached an irreversible state of moral degeneration by the time of Israel’s conquest under Joshua in 1406 B.C.E. Leviticus 18:21, 24–30 catalogues their abominations, including incest, bestiality, and child sacrifice. These were not cultural anomalies; they were institutionalized forms of worship. God had warned Israel not to imitate them precisely because “because the land has become defiled” and “the land will vomit you out” (Leviticus 18:25).

Genesis 15:16, spoken centuries earlier, anticipated this judgment: “the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete.” God delayed judgment for over four centuries, affording these peoples opportunity to repent—much like He did for Nineveh (Jonah 3:10). Yet, unlike the Ninevites, the Canaanites did not repent. Therefore, their judgment was not precipitous but long-delayed and fully merited.

God’s Sovereign Right as Creator and Judge

As Creator, Jehovah God possesses the unchallengeable right to give and take life (Deuteronomy 32:39). He is not obligated to extend life beyond what His purposes require. This is not arbitrary but flows from His perfect holiness, justice, and foreknowledge (Psalm 145:17; Deuteronomy 32:4). The Lord is never unjust in His decisions. When He brings judgment upon a people, it is never capricious or disproportionate.

The Hebrew terms used in the conquest narratives, such as herem (חֵרֶם)—translated “devoted to destruction”—do not imply uncontrolled violence but judicial execution according to divine decree. These judgments were exceptional, not normative; they were tied to the unique theocratic context of Israel’s occupation of the Promised Land.

The Threat of Canaanite Idolatry and Moral Contagion

God’s purpose in commanding total destruction was not rooted in ethnic hatred but in spiritual protection. Deuteronomy 20:16–18 explicitly states the reason: “so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable practices.” Israel’s repeated failures to obey these commands resulted in idolatry, child sacrifice, and moral collapse (Judges 2:10–13; 2 Kings 17:7–23). Total separation from these nations was not cruelty—it was covenantal preservation.

Joshua and Israel were not autonomous actors—they were executing divine judgment. This is crucial: they were instruments, not initiators. The moral responsibility for the judgment lies with the transgressing nations and the Sovereign God who decreed the judgment.

What of the Children? Divine Foreknowledge and Justice

The most difficult aspect of the Canaanite judgment concerns the children. Here, God’s foreknowledge, as articulated in Molinism, provides clarity. God, in His omniscience, knows not only what individuals will do, but what they would do under any set of circumstances (middle knowledge). He does not speculate—He knows. His decisions take into account the trajectory of human choices without coercing them.

God’s actions are never arbitrary. Consider Abraham’s plea in Genesis 18:23–32 regarding Sodom: Jehovah would not destroy the righteous with the wicked. If even ten righteous people had been found, including children, the city would have been spared. That principle remains consistent. In the Canaanite judgment, the absence of any righteous individuals, even among the children, validates the total judgment.

Young children in these cultures were not morally innocent in a theological sense (Psalm 51:5). While they had not committed personal acts of rebellion, they were part of a societal structure so steeped in evil that their maturation would only perpetuate it. God’s foreknowledge confirmed this trajectory. Therefore, early death, though tragic from a human standpoint, was not unjust from the divine perspective.

God’s Mercy Even in Judgment

The very fact that God gave Israel specific instructions to preserve certain peoples (Deuteronomy 20:10–15) and spared Rahab and her household (Joshua 6:25) reveals His discriminating justice and willingness to show mercy when repentance was present. Rahab was a Canaanite and a prostitute, yet she feared God and acted in faith (Hebrews 11:31). She was spared, demonstrating that repentance and faith—not ethnicity or age—were the criteria for survival.

Historical and Theological Necessity

These acts of judgment must also be viewed through the lens of redemptive history. God was preparing a nation (Israel) through which the Messiah would come (Genesis 12:1–3; Galatians 3:16). The spiritual contamination of Israel would have imperiled this purpose. Therefore, the judgment on Canaan was not merely about immediate punishment—it was about securing the lineage and covenantal structure that would culminate in the redemptive work of Jesus Christ.

Rejecting False Accusations Against God

Critics often charge God with cruelty, yet they reject His right to judge evil. These objections are rooted in a worldview that refuses to acknowledge sin’s gravity or God’s holiness. Without an objective moral standard, such criticisms collapse into relativism. If God does not have the right to judge His creation, then justice itself becomes subjective and arbitrary.

An Analogy: The Case of Foreknowledge and Adolf Hitler

As an illustrative analogy, consider the historical case of Adolf Hitler. Suppose a person had divine foreknowledge and could foresee the atrocities Hitler would commit. Would preventing his rise—even through early death—constitute cruelty? Clearly, the answer is no. Foreknowledge provides moral justification for preventative judgment. Similarly, God’s actions toward Canaanite children must be interpreted within the framework of His perfect foreknowledge and justice.

Conclusion: Divine Justice Without Apology

The destruction of Canaanite cities, including their inhabitants, was an act of divine justice against entrenched evil, carried out under God’s direct command after centuries of mercy and warning. Far from undermining God’s character, these events reveal His holiness, righteousness, and covenantal faithfulness. They also demonstrate His sovereign authority to judge, His wisdom in preserving His redemptive plan, and His capacity to act justly even when human understanding is limited.

God does not need to apologize for exercising His perfect justice. His judgments are pure, His knowledge is complete, and His love is not incompatible with righteous wrath. The accounts in Joshua and Deuteronomy are not ethical dilemmas—they are theological affirmations of a God who is both just and justifier.

Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All

$5.00

You May Also Enjoy

Self-Evident Truths: A Biblical and Rational Analysis of Objective Reality, Moral Absolutes, and Divine Revelation

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).