Why were the cities in Deuteronomy 3:5 completely destroyed? Canonical Text in Focus “All these cities were fortified with high walls, gates, and bars, and there were many more unwalled villages. So we devoted them to destruction, as we had done to Sihon king of Heshbon, devoting to destruction every city—men, women, and children.” (Deuteronomy 3:5-6) Geographical-Historical Setting The setting is Bashan, east of the Jordan, ruled by Og. Archaeology places the fortified tells of Bashan (e.g., et-Tell, Tell el-Ameireh) in the Late Bronze era, matching the biblical timetable c. 1406 BC. Stone “Cyclopean” walls still visible in the Golan align with the description “high walls, gates, and bars.” Israel’s army had just crossed the Arabah, defeated Sihon of Heshbon, and now faced cities guarding the northern plateau and the main trade artery (the King’s Highway). Strategically, leaving hostile strongholds intact would have strangled Israel’s entry into Canaan. Moral and Spiritual Condition of Og’s Cities Leviticus 18:24-25 records the Canaanite practices Israel had witnessed: ritual sex, bestiality, and child sacrifice. Ugaritic tablets (KTU 1.4; 1.10) corroborate such cultic violence and infanticide. Bashan belonged to that same cultural sphere. Deuteronomy 12:31 notes, “They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods.” Divine judgment was therefore judicial, not capricious. The Principle of ḥērem (Devoted to Destruction) ḥērem was not indiscriminate slaughter but a covenant-court decree removing what was irredeemably corrupt from the land God consecrated (Deuteronomy 20:16-18). As with Jericho later, everything living inside predetermined boundaries became “off-limits” spoil, symbolically returned to God. Human life belongs to the Creator; He alone sets its boundaries (Job 1:21). Divine Patience Exhausted God granted centuries of reprieve. “In the fourth generation your descendants will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete.” (Genesis 15:16). By Moses’ day, the measure was “complete.” Deuteronomy 2:30 adds that the LORD “hardened his spirit” of Sihon—language identical to Pharaoh—showing persistent rebellion after long mercy. Protection of Covenant Purity and the Messianic Line Intermarriage with unrepentant idolaters would have erased Israel’s identity and severed the genealogical path to Messiah (Genesis 12:3). Deuteronomy 7:4 warns that foreign gods “will turn your sons away from following Me.” Complete removal of militant practitioners, therefore, protected salvific history for all nations (Isaiah 49:6). The Giant Clans Factor (Rephaim/Nephilim Legacy) Og is called “the last of the remnant of the Rephaim” (Deuteronomy 3:11). His iron bed (about 13.5 ft × 6 ft) in Rabbah was preserved as evidence. The Rephaim trace back to the post-Flood resurgence of the Nephilim (Genesis 6, Numbers 13:33), portrayed as violent tyrants. Eliminating the strongholds of these clans removed a militarily superior, morally corrupt elite that terrorized the region (cf. Amos 2:9). Offer of Peace Refused Deuteronomy 20:10 mandates suing for peace first. Moses recounts, “I sent messengers… but Sihon… would not let us pass.” Og joined Sihon’s coalition (Numbers 21:23-35). Only after refusal and aggression did Israel engage. Thus the destruction was defensive-judicial, not imperialistic. Archaeological and Extrabiblical Corroboration • The Amman Airport Temple texts (15th c. BC) describe Molech rituals paralleling Leviticus’ prohibitions. • Excavations at et-Tell show Late Bronze burn layers and collapsed walls dated by radiocarbon (short chronologies point to c. 1400 BC), consistent with Israelite conquest. • Basalt structures called “Rujm el-Hiri” in Bashan, with cultic alignments, testify to an advanced but pagan megalithic culture, likely Rephaim-related. • The Merneptah Stele (c. 1208 BC) already acknowledges “Israel” in Canaan, implying an earlier exodus and conquest, harmonizing with a 15th-century date. Ethical Considerations and Common Objections 1. Why include children? Biblically, death ushers infants into God’s mercy (2 Samuel 12:23). Earthly life ended, but eternal destiny rests with a just Judge. 2. Is this genocide? No. Targets were limited, one-time, morally indicted cultures inside covenant borders. Israel was later judged just as severely (2 Kings 17; 25), proving impartiality. 3. Does this contradict “love your enemies”? Christ’s command applies to personal ethics under the new covenant. Israel’s theocracy operated under direct theodicy and temporal judgment unique to salvation history. Typological Foreshadowing of Final Judgment and Salvation Herem anticipates the final separation of evil from God’s restored creation (Revelation 20:11-15). Simultaneously, Rahab of Jericho and Ruth of Moab showcase Gentile inclusion when repentance occurs, revealing God’s consistent character of mercy amid judgment. Practical and Devotional Application • Holiness is not negotiable; hidden sin eventually receives public reckoning. • God’s long-suffering has limits; now is the day of salvation (2 Corinthians 6:2). • Believers must guard against syncretism, recognizing spiritual “strongholds” (2 Corinthians 10:4-5). • The total victory over Og typifies Christ’s triumph over death (Colossians 2:15); the believer stands in that victory. Conclusion The complete destruction of Bashan’s cities in Deuteronomy 3:5 was a measured, long-announced act of divine justice that preserved the redemptive storyline, protected Israel from terminal corruption, and modeled the ultimate eradication of evil. Far from contradicting God’s love, it demonstrates His righteous governance of history and His unwavering commitment to bring blessing to the world through a holy, set-apart people culminating in the resurrected Christ. |
    |