Holy War or Genocide? Rethinking God’s Justice in Joshua
One of the most persistent challenges in biblical theology is reconciling the seemingly divergent portrayals of God in the Old and New Testaments. Many readers struggle to understand how the God who commands the destruction of nations in Joshua can be the same God who offers salvation through the suffering of Jesus Christ. This tension often leads to caricatures of a wrathful Old Testament deity and a loving New Testament Savior. However, Scripture does not present two gods or conflicting moral standards. Rather, it testifies to one God whose holiness and compassion are fully revealed throughout redemptive history.
To understand God rightly, we must hold together the fullness of his character—his unwavering justice and his boundless mercy. Both Testaments reveal a God who judges sin but also extends grace to the humble. Whether in the divine commands given to Joshua or in the crucifixion of Christ, God's holiness is never compromised, and his compassion is never absent. This section explores how both of these attributes—compassion and holiness—are revealed in God's dealings with Israel, the Canaanites, and ultimately, the world through Jesus Christ.
We must also reflect on both the compassionate and holy dimensions of God as revealed throughout the Old and New Testaments. In the New Testament, God’s compassion is supremely displayed in the suffering of the innocent Christ—an act of sacrificial love offered for the salvation of those who believe (John 3:16). Yet that same suffering also powerfully reveals God’s holiness, for divine justice required that sin be atoned for. To fulfill God’s redemptive plan, his holiness could not be set aside; it had to be fully expressed and satisfied through the ultimate sacrifice—Jesus Christ, the sinless Son of God.
Likewise, in the Old Testament, God’s command to destroy the Canaanites was not only an act of holiness but also one of compassion—for his covenant people. God commanded Joshua to carry out this judgment to protect Israel from future corruption and destruction. God had warned Israel in Deuteronomy 20:16–18 not to allow survivors, “so that they may not teach you to do all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods.” Yet, some Canaanites survived (Joshua 13:1–6), and later they became a thorn in Israel’s side, leading them into idolatry and rebellion (Judges 2:1–3). Therefore, while the destruction of the Canaanites appears to be an extreme expression of God’s holiness, it also reflects his compassion for Israel. He acted to protect the covenant community from spiritual and physical ruin.
Some may still ask, where is God’s compassion for the Canaanites? Why does he appear so partial—protecting Israel while ordering judgment against other nations?
First, there is no injustice in God’s faithfulness to his covenant people. As Moses declared, the Lord did not choose Israel because they were numerous or powerful, but because he loved them and kept the oath he had sworn to their ancestors (Deuteronomy 7:7–8). God’s covenantal loyalty to Israel is not favoritism but faithfulness, whereas the Canaanites chose their own gods. To use a contemporary analogy, a president may offer aid to foreign nations, but his primary responsibility is to his own citizens. His commitment to them does not imply injustice toward others. Similarly, God’s dedication to Israel as his chosen people reflects the integrity of his promises, not a denial of compassion to other nations.
Second, as the sovereign Lord of all peoples, God demonstrated compassion even toward the Canaanites. They were not without knowledge of who he was. Rahab’s testimony reveals that the inhabitants of Jericho had heard how the Lord dried up the Red Sea and delivered Israel. Their hearts melted in fear, acknowledging the God of Israel as supreme (Joshua 2:10–11). For six days, Israel marched around Jericho—a symbolic and practical opportunity for surrender—yet the city did not repent. Only Rahab and her family responded in faith and were spared.
Similarly, the Gibeonites, though they used deception, sought peace with Israel upon hearing of God’s mighty acts. They recognized the God of Isarel and were afraid of them, humbling themselves and saying “Your servants have come from a very distant country because of the fame of the Lord your God. For we have heard reports of him: all that he did in Egypt, and all that he did to the two kings of the Amorites east of the Jordan—Sihon king of Heshbon, and Og king of Bashan, who reigned in Ashtaroth” (Joshua 9:9-10). Joshua honored their plea and made a covenant with them. Later, when five Amorite kings attacked Gibeon, Israel defended them, and God granted Israel victory (Joshua 10). These cases clearly show that those who acknowledged the God of Israel received mercy, even amid divine judgment.
Third, God applied the same standard of holiness and compassion to both Israel and the Canaanites. Throughout Israel’s wilderness journey, when the people rebelled against God, he did not hesitate to punish them—even to the point of death for men, women, and children. The families of Korah were swallowed up for their rebellion (Numbers 16:31–33), and during the idolatry at Baal Peor, 24,000 Israelites died in a divinely sent plague (Numbers 25:1–9). When Israel made the golden calf, about 3,000 were executed in judgment (Exodus 32:28). Yet whenever they repented, God showed compassion and restored them (Exodus 34:6–7). His justice and mercy were consistently applied within his covenant.
In contrast, the Canaanites, though informed of God’s power, chose resistance. Rahab had confessed that their hearts melted in fear, yet most did not submit to God. Instead, they actively opposed him. After the Gibeonites made peace with Israel, the kings of the Amorites formed a military alliance and attacked them (Joshua 10:1–5). Later, King Jabin of Hazor gathered a vast northern coalition to fight against Israel, despite knowing what God had done at Jericho and Ai (Joshua 11:1–5). These were not innocent bystanders but deliberate opponents of God’s purposes. They had opportunities to surrender, just as Rahab and the Gibeonites did, but chose to resist and conspire against God and his people.
Therefore, the divine command to destroy these nations was not the result of divine cruelty but of persistent rebellion in the face of revelation. God’s holiness demanded judgment, but his compassion was extended to any who responded in humility. The same God who judged the Canaanites was also the one who judged Israel. His character did not change. Both his holiness and his compassion were consistently and righteously displayed.
Lastly, the warfare practices described in the book of Joshua must be viewed within the Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) context, where total destruction of conquered cities—including the killing of civilians and dedication of spoils to gods—was common. The Hebrew term ḥerem aligns with such practices, seen in texts like the Mesha Stele, where King Mesha of Moab claimed to have “devoted” the city of Nebo to destruction in honor of Chemosh (Younger, Ancient Conquest Accounts). Assyrian annals also depict brutal conquests as acts of divine judgment and royal power (Walton, Lost World). These were not anomalies but reflected a cultural norm where annihilation was equated with victory and mercy was rare.
However, the biblical conquest narrative, while using similar language, reflects a covenantal ethic rooted in divine holiness and justice. God’s command to destroy was not arbitrary but morally framed. Rahab and her family were spared due to her faith, and the Gibeonites were preserved because they acknowledged God, despite their deception (Joshua 2; 6; 9). These cases show that mercy was extended to those who feared the Lord. Unlike ANE kings who glorified themselves through violence, the God of Israel judged sin but welcomed repentance (Longman, Joshua). When rightly understood, the conquest of Canaan reveals a God who upholds justice while extending mercy within a redemptive framework.
To summarize, the biblical portrait of God—across both Old and New Testaments—reveals a consistent and unified character: he is both holy and compassionate, just and merciful. In commanding the destruction of the Canaanites, God acted not out of cruelty but out of covenantal faithfulness—to protect his people from spiritual corruption and to execute righteous judgment against persistent rebellion. Yet even within these acts of judgment, his mercy was extended to those who feared him, such as Rahab and the Gibeonites. The same divine standard applied to Israel, who was not spared when they violated the covenant, but who also experienced God's compassion in response to repentance.
This same holy and loving God is fully revealed in the New Testament through the person of Jesus Christ. At the cross, the justice of God was upheld and his mercy poured out. The death of the innocent Son was not an exception to God’s character, but the ultimate expression of it. Through the suffering of Christ, God satisfied his own holiness and secured salvation for all who believe. As we reflect on both testaments, we are not left with a divided or conflicted image of God, but with a deeper understanding of his integrity and redemptive purpose. God’s compassion never negates his holiness, and his holiness never eclipses his compassion. They are held together in perfect unity in the heart of the one true and faithful God.