For today’s post we will tackle the question the Skeptic Annotated Bible asked: How should the Ammonites be treated?
Here are the answers which the skeptic believes indicate a Bible contradiction:
Do not fight against them or take their land.
“When you come opposite the sons of Ammon, do not attack them nor provoke them, for I will not give you any of the land of the sons of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the sons of Lot as a possession.’” (Deuteronomy 2:19)
“Only you did not go near the land of the sons of Ammon, all along the river Jabbok and the cities of the hill country, and wherever the Lord our God had commanded us to avoid.” (Deuteronomy 2:37)
Kill them and take their land.
“So Jephthah crossed over to the sons of Ammon to fight against them; and the Lord handed them over to him.” (Judges 11:32)
“Therefore behold, the days are coming,” declares the Lord, “When I will cause an alarm of war to be heard Against Rabbah of the sons of Ammon; And it will become a desolate heap, And her towns will be set on fire. Then Israel will take possession of his possessors,” Says the Lord.” (Jeremiah 49:2)
(All Scriptural quotation comes from the New American Standard Bible)
Here’s a closer look at whether or not there is a contradiction:
- When dealing with skeptics’ claim of Bible contradictions it seems one can never be reminded enough of what exactly is a contradiction. A contradiction occurs when two or more claims conflict with one another so that they cannot simultaneously be true in the same sense and at the same time. To put it another way, a Bible contradiction exists when there are claims within the Bible that are mutually exclusive in the same sense and at the same time.
- One should be skeptical of whether this is a Bible contradiction given the Skeptic Annotated Bible’s track record of inaccurately handling the Bible. See the many examples of their error which we have responded to in this post: Collection of Posts Responding to Bible Contradictions. Of course that does not take away the need to respond to this claim of a contradiction, which is what the remainder of this post will do. But this observation should caution us to slow down and look more closely at the passages cited by the Skeptic Annotated Bible to see if they interpreted the passages properly to support their conclusion that it is a Bible contradiction.
- The skeptic tries to pit both Deuteronomy 2:19 and Deuteronomy 2:37 as affirming the claim “Do not fight against the Ammonites or take their land” against both Judges 11:32 and Jeremiah 49:2 as affirming “Kill the Ammonites and take their land.”
- One must always figure out the context of the verses the skeptic cited.
- In supporting the claim “Do not fight against the Ammonites or take their land” the skeptics cited both Deuteronomy 2:19 and Deuteronomy 2:37 correctly. God in Deuteronomy 2:19 explicitly states He will not give them the Ammonites’ land to Israel. Deuteronomy 2:37 in the context of the previous verse (v.36) was talking about conquests so when it states in Deuteronomy 2:37 state not to go near the Ammonite we can understand that to say not to conquer land from the Ammonites. Also Deuteronomy 2:19 explicitly state do not attack the Ammonites.
- The skeptic did not cite Jeremiah 49:2 accurately and the verse does not tell Israel to go “Kill the Ammonites and take their land.” In the context this is God declaring prophecy that one day God will judge the Ammonites. What God informs Israel of what He Himself will accomplish as judgment is not the same thing as God telling Israel to kill the Ammonites themselves. While the verse does predict one day Israel will acquire Ammonites’ land it is after God’s judgment and not a command to Israel at the moment to go possess the land on their own. So it is not in conflict with with both Deuteronomy 2:19 and Deuteronomy 2:37 that commanded “Do not fight against the Ammonites or take their land.”
- The skeptic did not cite Judges 11:32 accurately and the verse does not say “Kill the Ammonites and take their land” as the skeptic understand it. Judges 11:32 does describe God using a Judge name Jephthah to fight the Ammonites and allowing Israel to experience victory over them. But the verse and the rest of the context of Judges 11 does not say Israel took their land after their victory. This is where the skeptic is wrong in interpreting Judges 11:32. Furthermore the context of Judges 11 is actually in agreement with God’s command in both Deuteronomy 2:19 and Deuteronomy 2:37 that Israel is not to fight against the Ammonites to take their land. In Judges 11:12 the Judge Jephthah send a messenger to ask the Ammonite king why are they attacking Israel. In Judges 11:13 the king of the Ammonite lied and said “It is because Israel took my land when they came up from Egypt, from the Arnon as far as the Jabbok and the Jordan; so return them peaceably now.”” According to Judges 11:14 Jephthah sent a messenger to the king of Ammon again and said “Israel did not take the land of Moab nor the land of the sons of Ammon” (v,15b) and from verses 16-27 Jephthah on behalf of Israel gave a lengthy historical account of how Israel did not attack Ammon nor took Ammonite land. Thus Judges 11 instead of being in conflict with Deuteronomy 2:19 and Deuteronomy 2:37 is actually in agreement that no land of Ammonite shall be seize through warfare by Israel.
- Here some might ask whether the war in Judges 11 in general conflict with Deuteronomy 2:19 and Deuteronomy 2:37.
- It must be noted that Deuteronomy 2:19 and Deuteronomy 2:37 is about not initiating aggression against the Ammonites for the seizure of Ammonite land.
- For Judges 11:32 remember the context of the chapter indicates that Jephthah’s military operation is defensive in nature after Ammonites aggression. Judges 11:4-5 indicates Ammonites started the conflict. Jephthah pursued diplomatic solutions for peace in verses 6-27 before the King of Ammon ignored Israel in verse 28 that led to Israel’s military operation.
- Military operation for self-defense does not conflict with passages about not going on the offense to start wars for territorial gain from the Annomites.
- A human example might be helpful here. When I was in the Marines whenever we were overseas the command made it very clear to use we are not to fights among the locals. But that doesn’t mean Marines can’t defend themselves if others attack or started fights with Marines. One time in an undisclosed European country I remember a Marine leader gave a very strong speech not to get into fights and if any Marine got in trouble he was going to personally punish us. Turns out when were out in town there were some trouble makers that physically assaulted a Marine and a big fight broke out. The Marine leader actually got physically involved and we all got scared if we would get in trouble during the next morning formation. The next day no one got in trouble as the strong exhortation not to cause trouble does not mean Marines cannot defend themselves.
- There is no contradiction here. Seems the skeptic needs to learn of How to Handle Bible Contradictions.
- We shouldn’t miss that worldviews are at play even with the skeptic’s objection to Christianity. The worldview of the author of the Skeptic Annotated Bible actually doesn’t even allow for such a thing as the law of non-contradiction to be meaningful and intelligible. In other words for him to try to disprove the Bible by pointing out that there’s a Bible contradiction doesn’t even make sense within his own worldview. Check out our post “Skeptic Annotated Bible Author’s Self-Defeating Worldview.”
[…] How should the Ammonites be treated? […]
Very thorough analysis here! One of your last statements sums up skeptics’ motivation, “worldviews are at play…” The world, “..under the control of the evil one..” continues attempts to disprove but thanks be to God for His unchanging word and for teachers like you!
Thank you Lisa for reading this and commenting. I appreciate the encouragement as I need God’s strength and wisdom to refute these every week. I want to refute all the ones listed In the skeptic annotated Bible, since it is often cited by skeptics to say there are Bible contradictions. Sometimes I type out their questions as a search on Twitter and see the amount of cut and paste atheists use their materials to attack Christians and it grieves me. So that motivates me to work on these alleged contradictions every week. Thanks for your support Lisa!
There must be a lot of skeptic allegations! Thank you Pastor for all your work, honoring God and standing upon His precious word.
Another great example of completely missing the context. You are right on base that this is a worldview problem.
Thanks for your diligence in taking these apart.
Blessings.
Excellent! Point 6 is a great example .
Thanks for reading and I’m point 6 was helpful! Your comment made me read it again and I notice some grammatical error I need to fix! How are you doing with the lockdown sister Crissy?
I am doing fine at the moment but it’s getting worse and now the virus is in my city 🥺
Thank you for caring
Have a blessed weekend pastor Jim.
Seems like the Skeptic was so happy with this entry until you refuted his claim, crumpled it, and thrown it in the thrash can. You are right, they never have the insight in Jeremiah nor read further Judges 11. Looks like the Skeptic is not a fan of basketball and offense and defense was out of his mind at that time. I wonder which European country is it. Blessings to you and your family!
Good analogy from Basketball of offense and defense! They totally butchered Jeremiah as you pointed out. I didn’t want to say the country directly but it’s one that had a big country next to it that invaded it though that big country said they didn’t. It begins with a U and there is a sea near it and the name of the sea is a name for a color. I know you are good with geography, does that give enough information?
Wow, you’ve been there on a mission! The big country that said that they didn’t invaded it but supported their…gives it away. They’ve got a big piece of it for domestic politics purposes of that very big country and the international community should be scared.
I know what country you are talking about
Excellent work! Context is king and the skeptic is the fool. I love how your Marines example, makes this refutation applicable! Jeremiah is yet future and what a horrific day it will be for all without Christ. May hearts turn to Jesus while there is still time. Love, hugs and blessings to you, Nancy and kiddos!
Amen that context is king! Hopefully the Marine illustration doesn’t seem like we Marines like to fight in people’s towns for no reason! You are right that Jeremiah’s passage the atheist cited is future. I love the evangelistic turn for your comment; may any nonbeliever who stumble upon this site read your comment and consider trusting in Jesus as Savior! I messaged our youth group yesterday about you going to share to them this Saturday; I’m praying sister for it to be helpful to the youth with what you are going to be teaching! How is your day going so far sister?
Your Marines illustration was excellent and other commenters agree!!
My day has some anxiety about this lesson. I emailed you and Ben telling Ben how much I loved his presentation and PowerPoint and I asked if I could use his slides, he said”yes.” However, as you know we don’t have his PowerPoint. I hate to ask you this but is there any way you can get ahold of Ben outside of email for his PowerPoint? I would be super appreciative. I can remake the slides however I was really wanting to tie my lesson with his “since repetition is the key to learning” (Dr Mark Meyer—which is what you are doing with each of these refutations, repeating the skeptic is faulty and the Word of God is Truth). Prayerfully this will help the youth think through instead of focusing on the question “why is xyz happening?” and ask instead “how do I respond biblically to the meaning of life” both for the pre-born and for those who are crying out for help/suicidal. This isn’t the whole lesson, no worries! If you don’t like this idea let me know as well!!!!
Thanks for thoroughly debunking another one of Steve/Stephen Wells’ very careless “contradictions.” Hey, anytime a bunch of Marines go walking through town I always make it a point not to mess with them! 🤕
I hope that Marine story wasn’t too much! I am often the designated sober guy since I don’t drink as a Christian. There’s been time I told people to move on and not fight with my drunk Marines I’m baby sitting and the people probably interpret that we are weak when it’s actually I’m trying to protect the civilians that want to fight, as some of the Marines I’ve seen fight and they can be vicious though I’m one of the smaller guys when I was in. I never understand how some people want to measure themselves by fighting a whole bunch of combat vet Marines. I think alcohol makes people have serious thinking impairment. Believe me when I say it’s not always Marines looking for trouble! How is your day off going?? How’s the book? I’m 226 page into my 376 page book!
People must be nuts to want to fight a Marine, must have to try to “prove” how macho they are. Yeah, alcohol removes a lot of inhibitions.
My day’s going good, thanks! Little odds and ends. Signed up for Medicare today seeing as I’m only a few weeks away from 65. I thought it would take a long time but it was quick. Only 20 pages to go on my nun clunker. Will finish tonight. You’re making good progress too. How’s your day looking so far?
The Marine analogy was really helpful
That’s not a good argument the skeptic makes here. Using sound hermeneutics is key. It’s so ridiculous to cite Jeremiah 49:2 to say its teaching Israel to attack the Ammonite! I don’t think the atheist website have the basic knowledge required for any type of critical analysis of the Bible.
Excellent refute.
Thanks Maw Maw for reading this! Hope some skeptics would find the answer and they know this is a bad attack on the Bible! Let’s pray for that!
I am in prayer fot this. Love in Christ Jesus.
Out of these four verse the atheist is most off in his interpretation of Jeremiah 49. Its not even in the realm of possibility of what the skeptic thinks the passage says.
So they are just saying all sorts of slander
Excellent post; thank you for sharing SlimJim ☺️. This is why it’s so important to really know your scripture and study it daily.
Romans 12 quotes God as saying, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay.” When we’ve been wronged, this might frustrate us when we see it as a rebuke or an order to “stand down.” But it is also a promise. God’s going to take care of it, and we don’t have to.
Amen! Hope you have a blessed Lord’s Day tomorrow sister!
Thanks, Jim, I did. I hope you did, too.
How many atheists actually believe this is a contradiction that read the passages in context? These guys are straight lying.
[…] 2.) Bible Contradiction? How should the Ammonites be treated? […]
That’s the problem with ANY skeptic of the truth of the Bible, the Word of God! They are so willing to take things out of context and twist them to suit their own needs. The sad fact is, we have preachers today who take little verses from here and there and try to create a doctrine out of them without sticking to the context of the Word, never mind the Spirit behind it. Great article brother!
The author of skeptic Annotated Bible is a fool, a coward and he is senile. He has done more damage to others’s eternity that I don’t know if some of them can recover
[…] How should the Ammonites be treated? […]