Why should the Israelites claim cities they did not build and harvest crops they did not plant (Deuteronomy 6:10–11), and doesn’t this raise ethical dilemmas? Background of Deuteronomy 6:10–11 Deuteronomy 6:10–11 states: “Then the LORD your God will bring you into the land He swore to your fathers—to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—that He would give you, a land with great and splendid cities that you did not build, with houses full of every good thing with which you did not fill them, with wells you did not dig and vineyards and olive groves that you did not plant—and when you eat and are satisfied…” These words sit within Moses’ broader farewell teachings, where he reminds the people of Israel how they should live once they enter Canaan. Many wonder: if Israel is to take over homes, cities, and fields that other people established, does this raise an ethical concern? Below is a thorough exploration of this question, considering historical context, theological principles, and textual insights. 1. Divine Ownership of All Lands From a Scriptural perspective, nothing ultimately exists outside the ownership of the Creator. Psalm 24:1 proclaims, “The earth is the LORD’s, and the fullness thereof.” The land of Canaan—no less than any other region—belongs to God. Therefore, God’s act of granting it to His covenant people is an expression of His sovereign prerogative. This is not arbitrary seizure. The same God who created the entire universe has the right to allocate the land to whomever He wills. Deuteronomy 9:4 clarifies that the Israelites are not receiving the land due to their own righteousness, but rather as an act of divine decision rooted in God’s justice and providential plan. 2. Covenant Promise and Fulfillment The idea of entering a land with established infrastructure and produce is part of a larger covenant promise. Genesis 12:1–3 presents the initial call of Abraham, where God vows to make Abraham a great nation and bless him. Later, in Genesis 15:13–16, God explains that Israel’s arrival in Canaan will come after “the iniquity of the Amorites” (a general term for the inhabitants of Canaan) has reached its fullness. From a timeline perspective consistent with a literal reading of Scripture, God delayed judgment for centuries, allowing time for these nations to turn from their harmful practices. When the time arrived to fulfill the promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, God led the Israelites to take possession of that land. Although it included ready-built cities and cultivated fields, the main point is that God is transferring stewardship to His covenant people, not that Israel is merely grabbing land. 3. Moral Dimension of Canaan’s Dispossession Sometimes the concern arises: “Is it fair for one group to take another’s cities and fields?” Deuteronomy 9:5 addresses this ethical tension, explaining that it is “on account of the wickedness of these nations” that they are being driven out. Historical and archaeological findings—such as excavations at sites like Gezer or Megiddo—reveal practices among Canaanite peoples that included child sacrifice (hinted at in passages like Leviticus 18:21 and Deuteronomy 12:31). The concept here is not a “land grab.” Rather, it is divine judgment on cultures whose detestable customs had reached a threshold of moral corruption. This judgment coincides with Israel’s arrival: God uses Israel to enact His verdict on those corrupt nations, just as, later in history, God uses invading powers (e.g., Assyrians or Babylonians) to judge the waywardness of Israel itself when they fell into similar sins (2 Kings 17:6–18; 2 Chronicles 36:15–17). 4. Israel’s Role and Responsibility Receiving these cities and vineyards also included a solemn responsibility. God cautions Israel in Deuteronomy 6:12: “be careful not to forget the LORD who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.” The emphasis is upon Israel’s fidelity to the one true God and its stewardship of what He entrusted to them. In taking over existing farms, wells, and towns, they were also expected to uphold covenantal laws—laws that included care for the vulnerable, honesty in commerce, and worship of God alone (Deuteronomy 6:13–15). Thus, Israel itself would be held to the divine standard. If they failed to remain true, they would lose these blessings (Deuteronomy 8:19–20). 5. Theological Context: A Gift and a Test Though these cities came “pre-built,” the deeper theological point is that God is both giving a gift and testing hearts. It would be easy to grow complacent amid immediate abundance. Moses repeatedly warns Israel not to be proud, for God’s blessings should nurture gratitude and humility rather than entitlement. God’s gifts are meant to highlight His faithfulness: • They confirm His promises to the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). • They underscore His mercy and provision. • They test whether Israel will remember the Giver or cling merely to the gifts. 6. Archaeological Insights Archaeological studies across the Levant have identified layers of destruction in certain city mounds, coinciding with time periods consistent with Israel’s entry into Canaan (commonly dated around the Late Bronze Age into the early Iron Age), although scholarly debates around specific dates persist. Sites like Jericho, Hazor, and Lachish show evidence that entire cities were destroyed and in many cases reoccupied. In the case of Jericho (Joshua 6), excavations have revealed collapsed walls consistent with a sudden demise, although interpretive debates remain. Artifacts discovered also suggest that agricultural stores already existed within the city. The biblical narrative in Joshua indicates Israel’s swift takeover; they would indeed have access to produce and resources they had not cultivated. These historical markers match Deuteronomy’s foretelling that Israel would inherit urban centers and farmland without having developed them. 7. Ethical Reflections in a Modern Lens Modern readers may find the concept of taking another nation’s territory ethically difficult. Scripture, however, depicts it as God’s sovereign judgment upon morally corrupt societies, combined with achieving His redemptive purposes through a chosen people. It is worth noting that later prophets and historical accounts show that Israel was similarly judged when it engaged in idolatry and the same detestable practices. Thus, God’s moral governance is applied consistently. The moral of the story is not national favoritism but fidelity and obedience to the Creator. 8. Conclusion: Faith, Judgment, and Covenant Promises Israel’s reception of “cities they did not build” and “vineyards they did not plant” was first and foremost an outworking of God’s covenant promise to Abraham and a display of divine justice against the longstanding wickedness of the inhabitants of Canaan. The passage in Deuteronomy does not champion greed or indiscriminate violent conquest; rather, it records a unique historical moment ordained by God, in which a promised inheritance and a long-delayed judgment converged. In every era, Scripture emphasizes that God’s blessings remain His alone to give, and that the recipients of such blessings must prove faithful stewards. Far from evading ethical responsibility, the Israelites themselves would eventually face their own dispossession when they forgot the Source of these gifts. The overarching narrative testifies that ultimate moral authority rests in the Creator, and He allocates land and blessings according to His righteous design. When “ethical dilemmas” arise, faith in the justice and sovereignty of the Creator—who owns all the earth—provides the lens through which these ancient events are understood. Deuteronomy 6:10–11 stands as a reminder of God’s faithfulness, the seriousness of sin, and the responsibility that comes with receiving divine favor. |
    |