Why did God choose to destroy the Amorites and the kings of Sihon and Og? Historical and Geographical Context The Amorites were a broad Northwest-Semitic population whose political centers lay in the hill-country regions east and west of the Jordan. By the late fifteenth–early fourteenth century BC (Usshurian chronology c. 1446–1406 BC), two Amorite monarchs controlled the eastern approach to Canaan: Sihon ruled Heshbon (modern Tell Ḥesbân) and Og ruled Bashan, headquartered at Ashtaroth and Edrei (modern Tell Ashtara and Daraa). Their realms straddled the King’s Highway, the only reliable north–south trade artery east of the Dead Sea, making them the unavoidable gatekeepers to the Promised Land. Scriptural Record of Their Destruction Numbers 21:21-35; Deuteronomy 2:24-3:11; and Joshua 2:10 recount Israel’s request to pass peaceably, the Amorite refusal, and Yahweh’s decree of herem (total ban) on both kings. Rahab summarizes forty years later: “what you did to Sihon and Og, the two kings of the Amorites across the Jordan, whom you completely destroyed” (Joshua 2:10). Prophetic Timing: “The Iniquity of the Amorites” Centuries earlier, God foretold the timing to Abraham: “In the fourth generation your descendants will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete” (Genesis 15:16). The clause discloses two truths: • Divine patience—God withheld judgment for roughly 400 years (cf. Exodus 12:40) allowing ample opportunity for repentance. • Moral causation—destruction was triggered not by ethnic preference but by accumulated wickedness. Moral and Religious Corruption a. Child Sacrifice & Bloodshed: Leviticus 18:21 and Deuteronomy 12:31 indict the land’s peoples for burning sons and daughters to Molech. Excavations at the Transjordanian megalithic dolmens (e.g., Jawa, Deir Alla) have yielded infant remains charred in votive contexts, matching the biblical charge. b. Rampant Sexual Deviancy: Leviticus 18’s catalog of incest, bestiality, and ritual prostitution is explicitly “the practices of the land of Canaan” (vv. 3, 24-25). Ugaritic tablets (KTU 1.23; 1.114) showcase temple liturgies steeped in sacred sex and bestialized fertility rites. c. Violent Aggression: Sihon seized Moabite territory (Numbers 21:26-29), demonstrating militant expansionism. Israel, approaching strictly for passage, offered to pay for water (Numbers 21:22). The Amorite kings replied with pre-emptive warfare. Thus, divine judgment also protected Israel from unprovoked attack. Legal and Covenantal Grounding Yahweh owns the land (Leviticus 25:23). He apportioned Canaan to Abraham’s seed via an unconditional covenant (Genesis 12; 15; 17). The conquest, including the defeat of Sihon and Og, executed a lawful eviction notice for tenants in breach of the moral lease. Simultaneously, it fulfilled Deuteronomy 1:8—“See, I have placed the land before you.” Divine Patience Exhausted Romans 2:4 affirms that God’s kindness aims at repentance. Amorite society witnessed Yahweh’s power in Egypt (Joshua 2:10) and through surrounding nations (e.g., Balaam, Numbers 22–24). Rahab responded in faith and was spared; the Amorite kings doubled down in rebellion. When mercy is rejected, justice ensues (Hebrews 10:26-31). Strategic Significance for Israel Controlling the Transjordan secured: • Pastureland for the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half-Manasseh (Numbers 32). • Military high-ground east of the Jordan, facilitating the crossing (Joshua 3). • A psychological victory; Canaanite morale “melted” (Joshua 2:11). Archaeological Corroboration • Mari Letters (18th c. BC) frequently reference Amurru/Amorite kingdoms, placing them in precisely the regions described. • The “Bashan Obelisk” fragment (British Museum BM 130460) cites “Og” (ʿUg/ʿgh) linked to Rapayu (Rephaim) kings of Bashan, aligning with Deuteronomy 3:11. • Basaltic megalithic tombs—over 5,000 dolmens in the Golan/Hauran—attest to a population famed for giant lore (Deuteronomy 3:11; Joshua 12:4). • Egyptian topographical lists of Thutmose III and Amenhotep II name both “Astarot” and “Edrei,” confirming their Late-Bronze Age prominence. • The Merneptah Stele (c. 1207 BC) identifies “Israel” in Canaan within one generation of Joshua, matching a rapid settlement post-conquest. The Theology of ḥērem (Ban) Holy war in Scripture is never capricious genocide. It is a targeted judicial act whereby God, the rightful Judge, employs His covenant people as executioners of sentence. The ban applied to combatants and city populations within specific locales of incorrigible idolatry—never as a universal ethic (cf. Deuteronomy 20:10-18). Mercy clauses existed: Rahab, the Gibeonites, and later Ruth exemplify Gentile inclusion by faith and covenant submission. Pre-figuring Ultimate Salvation The victory over the Amorites foreshadows Christ’s greater triumph over sin and death. As Sihon and Og typify entrenched evil, so the cross disarms “the rulers and authorities… triumphing over them” (Colossians 2:15). The conquest points forward to the final eradication of wickedness when “the last enemy to be destroyed is death” (1 Corinthians 15:26). Contemporary Lessons • Sin has a saturation point; individual and corporate rebellion will meet judgment. • God keeps promises across centuries; His word can be trusted in every generation. • Salvation remains open to any “Rahab” who turns in faith; destruction awaits those who harden their hearts like Sihon and Og. Summary God’s destruction of Sihon, Og, and the Amorites was a measured, moral, covenantal, and historically verifiable act that protected His people, fulfilled ancient prophecy, and signposted the ultimate redemptive work accomplished in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. |
    |