Does the Canaanite Narrative Warrant the Committal of Mass Violence?

        The command for the extermination of the Canaanites by YHWH has been used in different modernized and colonial settings to justify genocide, displacement, and dispossession of lands throughout the globe. While the original holy war passages seem dangerous in and of itself, it is crucial to keep in mind that without studying any text in context, these can be easily weaponized by certain people groups to warrant the committal of atrocious deeds. After identifying the reasons for why YHWH has given such command which resulted in the measures taken by the Israelites out of obedience, the question that lies is this: is mass violence permissible? I would argue that YHWH’s ultimate decision to wipe out the Canaanite nation is justifiable solely within the confines of covenant history and other doctrinal principles, and this narrative should not be appropriated to legitimize violence or any kind of devaluation beyond these bounds.

The American Ethos and the Canaanite Narrative

        The Judeo-Christian narrative of conquering land and settlement was particularly influential in the commencement of European Christian colonization of the Americas, both North and South. “The Conquest of Canaan” was an eleven-book poem written by Timothy Dwight in the year 1785 which patterns the Joshuan manner of conquest over an indigenous population, specifically the people of New England. Templer (2006, p. 360) sought to contextualize this epic as a mirror of the regenerative mythology foundational to the American ethos, a view wherein acts of violence such as mass killings of heathen tribes and the conquering of land is necessary for the renewal and strengthening of the identity of the nation. According to Templer (2006, p. 362), understanding the concept of historical regenerative nationalism then gives more background to present day US expansionism as a movement that may actually have been influenced by sacralized ideological roots. Ultimately, however, this epic illuminates the epitome of Puritan ideology, which is essentially the rationalization of God’s command for genocide solely for the purpose of an ethnically cleansed New Canaan (Templer 2006, p. 361).

        The Puritans were Protestant Christian individuals from Europe who came to North America, specifically New England, under the impression that their mission was divinely sanctioned or ordained by God, especially with the striking antitypes employed by Dwight in his epic of the original Canaanite conquest and the Puritan colonization of New England in the 1600s. The more “heathen” the people, the more they felt it to be righteously mandated for them to carry out the mission as the “New Israel” in New England of a “New Canaanite alterity.” Symbolically, the Puritans wiped out the Wampanoag tribe similarly to how the Israelites wiped out the Canaanites in Deuteronomy. However, interestingly enough, in Harry Stout’s great archival collection of Puritan sermons, only one sermon directly related the 1676 Wampanoag victory of the Puritans to the successful Canaanite conquest, despite Puritan ideologies immensely drawing from this narrative in their colonizations. While Templer (2006, p. 383) notes this to be a possible discursive tactic by the people to refrain from explicitly mentioning biblical acts of violence, it may also imply that these doctrines have been deeply ingrained or embedded in Puritan thought such that explicit mention of the Canaanite narrative is no longer necessary. As far as I speculate, it may be fair to assume the latter since a deep belief or conviction of the masses must have premeditated the Puritan colonialism of New England where they saw it only right to commit genocide.

The “New Canaanites” and the Palestinians

        While the American ethos reflects the Canaanite narrative in a way that has been appropriated for the benefit of the people using it, the case with the modern day Palestinians is a reversal of the position, such that they are situated at the receiving end of the narrative. There has been a growing counter-hegemonical understanding among these groups of what they have been already experiencing for over five centuries, and especially for modern day Palestinians who see their position as “the latter day Canaanites” (Templer 2006, p. 360). Messianic Zionists or religious nationalists of Israel are convinced that the same God who stood by and fought for Joshua bin Nun is also the same God who upholds the cause of David Ben-Gurion, former Prime Minister of Israel, in claiming the West Bank in Palestine. In this context, even modern day Palestinians are treated as if they were the ancient Canaanites – mere tenants in their own land who have minimal rights for consideration, and just another “Other” that must be subjugated or removed. By the end of Ben-Gurion’s first term, he was already referring to the Bible as Israel’s “title-deed to Palestine” and used it to continue his operations of military exploitation and territorial expansion.

       In an interview with a local Jew, Fisk (2019, p. 24) mentioned in his paper how when this individual was asked if the Canaanite killings were permissible, he said it was only so because it was divinely sanctioned. Still, one cannot deny the tragedies of the Canaanite families, who have labored much in their days then have all their possessions taken away from them, as expressed sentimentally by Beit-Hallahmi (1993, p. 167): 

What gives us the right to reap the fruits of trees we have not planted, to take shelter in houses we have not built? … ON what moral grounds shall we stand when we take ourselves to court?

The Canaanite narrative in the present times

        Given the numerous doctrinal elements at play in the original narrative of the Canaanite conquest, how come pre-colonial and modern groups were able to appropriate this narrative and utilize it to carry out their personal agendas? From the case of the American ethos and the Palestinian dispossession, I would argue that the groups behind these events held the conviction of a self-perceived destiny fulfillment thinking that it was God-ordained. This belief that they indeed have a divine prophecy to fulfill creates a sense of “chosen-ness,” inevitably leading to a sense of “othering” much like in the elect vs. anti-elect notion of the Israelites and the Canaanites, except for these groups it was self-imposed. For instance, Templer’s attempt to contextualize Dwight’s narrative of the Canaanite conquest as reflective of the American ethos added depth to understanding the influence of biblical elements in the inception of the colonial period. It goes without saying then that this additional perspective must be acknowledged and addressed, along with slavery, racism, and the need for the West to propel global “cleansing” or civilization, in order to ensure that we as a society do not repeat the horrors of what these ideologies have caused.

While it was barely touched upon in the inquiry paper, special emphasis should be given to the concept of the covenant, specifically God’s covenant with the Israelites and God’s covenant with us. I would assert that the purpose of the Canaanite narrative is to show the rich history of the Israelite nation with YHWH and how, throughout time, He showed loyalty and honor both to His people and His covenant with them by protecting them from external pagan threats. Thus, to utilize the Canaanite narrative as a moral compass or a justification for conquest would in itself be ignorant and negligent of the Old Testament authors’ intentions. It is here then that we can see how Scripture, although discussing the historical events under the old covenant, likewise points to the coming and fulfillment of a new covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-33 prophesies of a new covenant that God will make with His people that is “not like the covenant I made with their ancestors,” the fulfillment of which can be found in Luke 22:20 when Jesus speaks:

“This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.”

        The Apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 3:6 then goes on to say that the believers are ministers of this new covenant through the Spirit, wherein Hebrews 8:13 adds that in speaking of a new covenant, the first one is made obsolete. The new covenant ultimately encompasses the timeframe of contemporary times, the colonial and pre-colonial period, and even hundreds of years before the great European exploration, nullifying the usage of the Israelite conquest of Canaan for the justification of mass violence since it was primarily done in such a contrasting and specific national-religious domain.

        The Apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 3:6 then goes on to say that the believers are ministers of this new covenant through the Spirit, wherein Hebrews 8:13 adds that in speaking of a new covenant, the first one is made obsolete. The new covenant ultimately encompasses the timeframe of contemporary times, the colonial and pre-colonial period, and even hundreds of years before the great European exploration, nullifying the usage of the Israelite conquest of Canaan for the justification of mass violence since it was primarily done in such a contrasting and specific national-religious domain.

        It would perhaps not be plausible to vilify the individuals or groups who had the conquest narrative, or at least a less physically violent version of it, ingrained in their thinking, for this would keep a person from assessing themselves and identifying similar patterns of thought that they might hold. However, the action that arose from this narrative is worth condemning not only because of the inflicted harm and chaos, but because of the dangerous yet simple principle behind it: devaluation. The large-scale mass violence and dispossession reflected in the two cases above are the result of groups reducing other individuals to a hindrance or inconvenience to their “divinely mandated promise,” thus viewing them as a mere eliminable object. It is likewise important to note that this action of devaluation was practiced by the religious leaders during the time of Jesus of Nazareth towards the sinners and outcasts (Luke 15:2) and was met with harsh rebuke from Jesus Himself (Matthew 23).

        Although the Canaanite narrative is not a topic that is typically included in the sermons of present-day churches, theologically challenging texts should still be addressed in one way or another by pastors and other church leaders. Specially detailed analyses of these texts can be done in more partisan settings, such as in schools of theology education, spearheaded by the church leaders themselves. Despite the low probability of the Canaanite narrative appropriation being applicable to the modern man’s everyday life, the sense of “othering” remains a risk that one must constantly beware of. The most prominent of which is the believer vs. unbeliever narrative; while the “Canaanite party” in this scenario may not necessarily be the receptor of physical injury, harm can be reflected in other ways, such as judgement and disregard. Jesus addresses this in The Beatitudes during the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:3-10) and other chapters in the book of Matthew, where He combats the devaluation of others by teaching how the last will be first and the first will be last in His kingdom (Matt. 20:16). Recalling biblical values of humility and servitude enables modern day Christians to keep watch from the dangers of misinterpreting biblical texts and ultimately, misrepresenting God.

        Thus, the Canaanite conquest biblical narrative has been used by other individuals and groups for the political-theological rationalization of genocide and violence among an identified other. This has been the scaffolding ideology for Western expansion and imperialism since the 1500s for the so-called “divinely-sanctioned” dispossession and subjugation of native groups across the world. The appropriation of this narrative has caused harm and chaos, and while some may argue that it is through violence why Christianity was introduced to these groups, it was not God’s original design nor intention to reach out to the peoples through a twisted narrative of an isolated command He gave to ancient Israel. While YHWH operated out of His own divine and just judgement, the people took a biblical narrative for their own desires of elitism and exclusivism and fulfillment of selfish agendas.

        The Canaanite conquest biblical narrative has been used by other individuals and groups for the political-theological rationalization of mass violence towards an identified other. This has been the scaffolding ideology for Western expansion in the 1500s and the Palestinian dispossession through military arms by David Ben-Gurion in the 1900s. The appropriation of this narrative has caused harm and chaos not just because of the events themselves, but because of the eventual distortion of ideologies that the passage was claimed to express. While YHWH operates out of His own divine and just judgement, present day individuals must become wary not to take a biblical narrative out of context for their own desires of elitism, exclusivism, and fulfillment of selfish agendas.

References: 

Fisk, Bruce N. 2019. “Canaanite Genocide and Palestinian Nakba in Conversation: A Postcolonial Exercise in Bi-directional Hermeneutics.” Journal of Holy Land and Palestine Studies 18 (1): 21–49. https://doi.org/10.3366/hlps.2019.0201.

Frankel, David. 2020. “Israelites and Non-Israelites in the Land of Promise - Use of Biblical Models in the Construction of a Jewish Theology Coexistence.” Jewish Studies 55:1-44. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27014979.

Kaminsky, Joel. 2003. “Did Election Imply the Mistreatment of Non-Israelites?” Harvard Theological Review 96, no. 4 (October): 397-425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816003000506.

Lukin, Volodymyr. 2025. “The Relationship between the Motif of Memory/Remembrance and One of its Aspects Concerning the Command to Exterminate the Canaanites in Deuteronomy 7.” Theological Reflections Eastern European Journal of Theology 23 (1): 46-63. https://doi.org/10.29357/2789-1577.2025.23.1.3.

Schlimm, Matthew. 2025. “Noah's Inebriated Curse (Gen 9:20-27).” Harvard Theological Review 118, no. 2 (July): 181-202. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816025100655.

Templer, Bill. 2006. “The Political Sacralization of Imperial Genocide: Contextualizing Timothy Dwight’s the Conquest of Canaan.” Postcolonial Studies 9 (4): 358–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790600993230.

Timmer, Daniel. 2015. The Non-Israelite Nations in the Book of the Twelve: Thematic Coherence and the Diachronic-Synchronic Relationship in the Minor Prophets. N.p.: Brill.