The God of the bible—the one true God that exists—is the Creator of all things, King over all, loving, gracious, righteous, sovereign, and entirely free to do whatever He wishes. Yet somehow, this Creator of the universe has been put on trial by His own creation—haughty men who object to the ways of their Creator, who take offense at any biblical truth that conflicts with their rebellious ways. Such men, therefore, usually go on to deny the existence of God altogether, yet ironically continue to spend much of their energies ridiculing this God who supposedly doesn’t even exist. What’s more, this “non-existent” God they are judging is the very One who set the moral standards by which they are judging Him. They are playing by His own rules, whether they realize it or not. They fail to realize, however, that God is not bound to the rules He has set for man. He is indeed bound by His character, to be sure. But this only confirms that all of His ways are good and righteous and just, for that is who He is.
Now, this righteous God is by no means one to be put on trial, for He is the God who has the power to save and the power to send to hell (Luke 12:5), and most likely finds such a proposal quite amusing. But with so many false accusations toward the God of the bible floating around (notice it is only the God of the bible who people take offense to, not the “gods” of other religions…probably because it is hard to be offended by something that doesn’t exist), it seems necessary to correct faulty ideas and to defend what the bible actually teaches concerning these “offensive” topics. Now, there are undoubtedly multiple offensive claims against certain teachings in the bible to which supposed atheists declare “I can’t believe in a God who would do that.” But to narrow in on three prominent attacks commonly made by atheists, this defense will address the accusation of God’s portrayal of pride and vanity, the supposed “genocide” He commands in the Old Testament, and a favorite among many (of atheists and Christian alike!)—how a God of love can elect only some to salvation and not others. With the need for many words to be given their proper definition, and with the aim of viewing God in His rightful place on the throne…let the defense begin.
Throughout the bible, God is portrayed as doing all that He does for the glory of His name. Because of this, He has been accused of craving praise and exhibiting pride and vanity. Richard Dawkins, an atheist widely known as one of the Four Horseman, claims that God is obsessed with “His own superiority over rival gods.” He alludes to (and distorts) verses such as 2 Sam. 7:23, where he says God is only out to “make a name for Himself,” and Psalm 106:8, which declares that God delivered His people from Egypt “for the sake of His name.” While Dawkins may initially seem to have a point, the problem is, the fact that God is God-centered actually isn’t a problem at all! But a closer look reveals that not only is He God-centered, but He is also very much (and even more so) others-centered, as a brief look at the cross will magnify that in an instant.
But first, before highlighting His humble, self-giving nature, correct definitions of the words “pride” and “humility” need to be clarified. Although the idea of being “proud of who you are” has become commonly viewed as healthy in today’s society, pride actually implies an inflated view of oneself; it is a “lie about our own identity or achievements.” Humility, then, involves a realistic view of oneself. It is to acknowledge one’s proper place and not pretend to be something different. So what does this make of God? God—being God—seems to have a pretty realistic view of Himself! God, by definition, is “the greatest conceivable being” (a particular favorite emphasis of Anslem), which makes Him the only One worthy of worship. He by no means has an inaccurate view of Himself, therefore exhibiting no sense of pride. But what’s more, even though He has every right to demand praise and worship, He actually isn’t the one who commands His creation to praise Him. The bible actually portrays His people “calling on one another to do so—to recognize God’s greatness and worth-ship.” God, in His self-sufficiency, doesn’t need praise from anyone. His people, however, rejoice in praising Him, for it allows the expression and even completion of their enjoyment of Him. As C.S. Lewis writes, “We delight to praise what we enjoy because the praise not merely expresses but completes the enjoyment; it is its appointed consummation.” It is not divine pride, therefore, that is portrayed by God in the bible, but divine humility.
One of the very reasons (among many) that God’s people delight so much in praising Him is due to the very fact of His divine humility as portrayed through the incarnate Christ which provided the way for their salvation. Think about it! God…God!…the holy, set-apart, self-sufficient Creator of the universe—in response to His rebellious creation and with compassion toward their hopeless state—lowered Himself from His throne-room in heaven and took on the form of a man, coming to this earth not to be served, “but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). And do to do, He bore the guilt and shame of His people on the cross, taking on their punishment and providing for them the only hope they ever had of being reconciled to God. The wonder of it all! If receiving these truths ignites no spark of praise and worship, but leaves one continuing in a spirit of hostility and accusation, well…there’s reason to be alarmed.
Now, along with critiques from atheists such as Richard Dawkins and others, there have also been many incidents throughout history in which self-acclaimed believers have turned their backs on their faith due to difficult texts in the Old Testament in which God is presented in a light that they would prefer not to see Him in. Particularly, the “genocide,” or “ethnic cleansing,” of the Canaanites as portrayed in Deut. 7, 20, and in Joshua—ordered by God Himself—is especially difficult for some to succumb to. The difficulty, however, derives from a misunderstanding of who God is, a misplacement of the term “genocide,” and the purpose behind what is actually taking place. Very seldom does the offended party ask historical questions about the matter, nor do they inquire what the writer wants to communicate about God (or more accurately, what God wants to communicate about Himself). The purpose here, then, is to address such issues—appropriating this apparent genocide in its historical context, as well as uncovering what is actually and truly being communicated about God.
​To begin, the terms “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” must be properly defined, as it is the cruel brutality of the meaning of these words that mislead and offend the reader when applying them to the Old Testament texts such as Deut. 7 and 9. According to Dawkins, the killing of the Canaanites was indeed an act of ethnic cleansing, in which “bloodthirsty massacres” were carried out with “xenophobic relish.” However, as Paul Copan points out, “Dawkins isn’t exactly interested in accuracy, so he resorts to misleading rhetoric to sway the jury.” He is misleading, indeed, for ethnic cleansing is actually a fueled product of racial hatred. A close look at the texts, however (actually, even a far look would suffice in this case), disproves any notion that the Israelites were fueled by hatred—nor were prompted by xenophobia (fearful of strangers)—in their motive for killing the Canaanites. On the contrary, God actually commands Israel on several occasions to show concern for non-Israelites (Lev. 19:34; Deut. 10:18-19), so as to remind them that they were once slaves in Egypt and to warn them against oppressing others as they had been oppressed.
​So then, if Dawkins is wrong, and genocide—given its true meaning—is actually an extremely inappropriate term for this occasion, how then should this ban of the Canaanites appropriately be labeled? Well, “ban,” in fact, is pretty accurate!—as it is the word used in Hebrew (chērem) that addresses the slaughter of all enemy men, women, and children in multiple texts, such as Num. 21:2; Josh. 6:18-19, and 1 Sam. 15. The Hebrew root of this word ban or chērem carries with it “the notion of destruction and separation or devotion to,” with both notions often occurring together in the same passage. As explained by Old Testament scholar Walter Kaiser,
It means “curse,” “that which stood under the ban,” or “that which was dedicated to destruction.” The root idea of this term was “separation”: however, this situation was not the positive concept of sanctification in which someone or something was set aside for the service or glory of God. This was the opposite of the same side of the coin: to set aside or separate for destruction. God dedicated these things or persons to destruction because they violently and steadfastly impeded or imposed His work over a long period of time.

Now, the Israelites were indeed being set aside for the service and glory of God, but what needs to be noted is that the Canaanites were not executed by means of hateful, unjust genocide on neither the Israelites’ nor God’s part. They were indeed wicked, and it was only by God’s grace that His judgment upon them was postponed for so long.
​This, now, may raise the question as to just how wicked the Canaanites were. In other words, were they truly deserving of such a harsh punishment? Well, asking such a question probably reveals an underestimated, low-view of God’s holiness, as well as an underestimation of the offensiveness of even their own sin against God. To be sure, it is a wonder that God doesn’t deal justly with His own people Israel as they repeatedly complain, disobey, and rebel against God throughout the narrative of the Old Testament texts (and still today!). But for the sake of satisfying the question—yes, the Canaanites were, indeed, an extremely wicked, idolatrous people. Just how wicked? Well, as Paul Copan puts it, “We’re familiar with the line, ‘The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.’ In the case of the Canaanites, the Canaanites’ moral apples didn’t fall far from the tree of their pantheon of immoral gods and goddesses.” And in case one is unaware, these gods and goddesses were thought to engage in incest, bestiality, violence, and homosexual acts—all of which were “imitated” by the Canaanites, as well as adultery and child sacrifices (Lev. 18:20-30). To be sure, profound moral judgment was truly justified, and as stated earlier, it is only a wonder that God prolonged this judgment for such a long period of time—430 years to be exact! He could have very well poured His judgment on them back in Abraham’s day, but according to Genesis 15:16, “the sin of the Amorite [a Canaanite group] had not yet reached its limit.” The time apparently wasn’t ripe in God’s sight for the land to “vomit them out” just yet (Lev. 18:25). But God very well knew (that is, ordained) that their time would come; their time, one may say, “of no return,” when God would in fact consider them “ripe for His judgment.” And all of this, it should be carefully noted, would be carried out “in keeping with God’s saving purposes in history.”
​While acknowledging that God is justified and righteous in all that He does—both in these Old Testament texts as well as all throughout history—it should still be noted that this order to destroy the Canaanites occurs only in this particular time and place in history, in a very unique closed system of ethics. This is not an open-ended protocol; for no other kings are ever found doing this, nor are they ever called to do it. Rather, this closed system dwells within an ancient Near-Eastern monarchy, with an internal administration of law and war. This, then, eliminates the often-made comparison to Islamic Jihad, for this is an unusual historical circumstance, not an ongoing norm of behavior. Nor is God’s purpose in this circumstance arbitrary, as Allah’s dealings with man seem to be.
​So what was God’s overarching goal throughout this particular historical narrative? Along with showing forth His greatness (and arguably, even His grace!), it was actually “to bring blessing and salvation to all the nations, including the Canaanites, through Abraham” (Gen. 12:3; 22:17-18), 28:13-14). (Now, one may inquire how the Canaanites are included in this, if they were supposedly obliterated. But the mistaken idea of their absolute destruction actually cannot be valid, for why, then, did God warn the Israelites against intermarrying with them even after the fact? Rather, Joshua was using hyperbole when he spoke of their obliteration, which was completely common and correctly understood in his day). For this specific (and strategic) period, God established Israel in the land with his view of fulfilling His long-term, global plan of redemption. This had to include pouring judgment on the Canaanites, for “not doing so would have erased humankind’s only hope for redemption.” In the words of Paul, “Behold, then, the kindness and severity of God!” (Rom. 11:22).
​This leads to the final discussion, where God’s “kindness and severity” may be portrayed more than anywhere. Perhaps this is the most offensive truth displayed in the bible, to both atheists and Christians alike, causing, even, many a believer to turn from their faith due to their inability to grasp (what apologist James White even titled one of his books) the Potter’s freedom. And this undermined view of God’s freedom and authority that He owns on His throne is the very source of the problem resonating in offended men (when really, there is nothing to be offended by at all, but rather, there is plenty to rejoice in). As C.H Spurgeon notes,
“There is nothing for which the children of God ought more earnestly to contend than the dominion of their Master over all creation—the kingship of God over all the works of His own hands—the throne of God, and His right to sit upon that throne […] On the other hand, there is no doctrine more hated by worldlings as the great, yet most certain doctrine of the sovereignty of the infinite Jehovah. Men will allow God to be everywhere except upon His throne.”

Unfortunately (or rather, fortunately), it is not up to men to allow God to do anything. He is on His throne, whether they like it or not. And, just as in the other cases, their disapproval of what He does on His throne does nothing to support their new denial of His existence; for why would they be so offended by a fictitious God?
​Surely because He is, in fact, God. In the words of James White, He is the one true God, the “absolutely free Creator, the Potter, who has complete sovereignty over the pots.” Who, then, are the pots to argue with the Potter? Yet they foolishly do. And so God says, “Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker—an earthenware vessel among the vessels of the earth! Will the clay say to the potter, ‘What are you doing?’” (Isaiah 45:9). God is clearly emphasizing the foolishness of man’s attempt to question Him. Clay, by nature, is under the sovereign power of the potter, and the potter is “free and unfettered” by any considerations the clay may present. How will the thing “being made” deny the very hands that form and fashion its shape? Yet, as White assures, “this is the very attitude of man today: There is no Creator, and all evidence of His existence must be immediately dismissed.” And even among those who proclaim to be believers, there is a hesitance to profess God as the free Creator and determiner of each man’s shape and destiny.
​Now imagine, if the idea of God’s creatorship of man is offensive to some, one can only guess how these same men respond to the idea of God’s sovereignty over each person’s eternal destiny. This idea—as biblical as it is—is often viewed as repulsive, and leads many to accuse God of unrighteousness. As R.C. Sproul writes, “The idea that there may be unrighteousness in God is related to God’s choice of some for salvation while passing over others. It does not seem ‘fair’ or ‘right’ for God to bestow His grace on some but not on others.” Many objectors ask how God could decide to bless Jacob and not Esau before either one was born. How is it that God chose to love Jacob and hate Esau, regardless of their actions and even before they were given a chance to do good or evil? Well, Paul answers this very question by referring to God’s words to Moses: “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion” (Rom. 9:15). And God has the very freedom to do so! Yet it should not be overlooked that He dispenses His freedom perfectly and righteously. As Sproul rightly insists, “It is God’s prerogative to dispense His grace however He sees fit. He owed Jacob nor Esau any measure of grace. Had He chosen neither, He would have violated no precept of justice or righteousness.” Yet somehow, it is often still assumed that if God gives grace to one person, then He “ought”—for the sake of fairness—to give grace just as equally to another. But it is this very sense of “oughtness” that is foreign to biblical grace. As Sproul asserts, “Among the mass of fallen humanity, all guilty of sin before God and exposed to His justice, no one has any claim or entitlement to His mercy.” Truly, the only entitlement any man rightfully has any claim to is that of judgment, and it is for this reason that God is all the more to be worshipped, that He would so graciously extend mercy to any at all.
​Finally, alluding back to the analogy of the potter and the clay, another portion of scripture draws much attention to this, and in doing so, reveals significant insight into God’s purposes in His unconditional election:
Hath not the Potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? What if God, willing to show His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction; and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared unto glory beforehand? (Romans 9:21-23).

What first needs to be highlighted is that the elect and non-elect are said to be “of the same lump.” This supports Ephesians 2:3, which reveals that all people are by nature children of wrath. Therefore, in agreement with A.W. Pink, “it is fortunate that the destiny of every person is decided by the will of God, because if it were left up to us, we would all end up in the lake of fire.” And while this should consequently lead to the fullest praise to God from His creatures, the pride of man’s heart too often prevents this appropriate response. Pink rightly suggests that “in our day of intellectual pride and the worship of man, it is very humbling for the proud heart to succumb to the fact that every human being is in the hand of God like clay in the potter’s hand.” Yet this is precisely how the bible presents it. And while it is certain that God will be perfectly just in His dealings with his creatures, the text in Romans reveals that He shapes His vessels according to His own purpose and pleasure…and He owns the indisputable right to do so. But surely—and it needs to be realized—the wonder is not that He would withhold grace from some, but that He would choose to give it to any! He is a merciful God, indeed.
​So what shall we say to these things? Hopefully, rather than hardening one’s heart against God even more, the obvious better choice will be made, which is to confess God’s rightful place on the throne and to surrender to His lordship. And in doing so, one will realize that He is not only the sovereign Judge over all, but He is the ever-merciful King, showing kindness and grace and immeasurable goodness to those who follow Him. At the end of the day (or more accurately, at the end of one’s life), God will be perfectly just in saying to those who refused Him, “Thy will be done.” But how much sweeter will that day be for those who say to God now, “Thy will be done.” And how gracious that He allows any to do so! How blessed are the ones who receive His grace! For they will be ever singing in His heavenly kingdom of the goodness and love and grace of their Savior:

“Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me;
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

Yes, when this flesh and heart shall fail
And mortal life shall cease,
I shall possess within the veil
A life of joy and peace.

When we’ve been there 10,000 years
Bright shining as the sun,
We’ve no less days to sing God’s praise
Than when we first begun.”

“Behold, then, the goodness and severity of God.” –Rom 11:22
​

​