Let's talk about something tough: Reading commands in the Old Testament, like God commanding the the slaughter of the Canaanites, and feeling deeply disturbed. You know God is good and loving, but these texts about total destruction seem to brutally conflict with God's character.

If you've ever felt that tension, wondering how to hold onto both God's goodness and the Bible's truth without resorting to easy answers, you're definitely not alone.

But here's the frustrating part: Often, the answers we hear feel thin. They seem like making weak excuses for God, or worse, suggesting we just have to conclude that the Bible itself must be mistaken about what God actually commanded.

What if, however, the real key isn't about finding excuses or errors, but about learning to read these texts differently by asking what God, in His perfect goodness, was truly aiming for in those specific, ancient situations? What if focusing on God's good goals within their unique context could unlock a path forward, could unlock a way to see coherence that affirms both His unchanging character and Scripture's reliability?

That's exactly what I want to introduce today: the basics of a framework called Covenant Virtue Ethics (CVE). It’s not about finding loopholes, but about reading more carefully and understanding God's good purposes, even within the Bible's most challenging passages.

God Always Aims for Good: The Heart of CVE

So, how do we actually start thinking differently? We begin where the Bible itself consistently points us: God's character is fundamentally GOOD. Think about how God describes Himself, as loving, merciful, gracious, patient, faithful, AND just (Exodus 34 is key here!). CVE takes this as non-negotiable. But if God is truly good, how could He possibly command things that seem so... not good? Here’s the crucial shift CVE offers: Because God is perfectly good, His ultimate aims or goals (what CVE calls His 'Targets') in any situation must also be aimed at achieving something genuinely good. God literally cannot have evil as His final goal. It violates His very nature. Understanding this difference between God's good aim and the methods used is foundational.

Putting on CVE Glasses: A Framework for Understanding

Okay, believing God aims for good is one thing, but how does that help untangle those specific, troubling commands? CVE gives us a practical set of questions that are like putting on special glasses to see the situation more clearly.

First, it insists we ask, what was the specific situation back then? It’s so easy to read these thousands-of-years-old texts through our modern lens. We have to pause and consider the unique historical culture, God's specific covenant relationship with Israel at that moment (what CVE calls the 'Field'), and critically, the specific problem God was addressing (the 'Basis'). Was the problem just giving them Promised Land, or something deeper like destructive, systemic wickedness that threatened everything? Context is king.

Second, armed with that context, CVE asks, what was God’s good aim (His Target)? Knowing God is good (Exodus 34), what positive goal, consistent with His character, was He working towards in that specific situation? Was He aiming for justice against horrific evil? Was He aiming to protect His people to preserve His rescue plan for the world? Was He aiming to keep a crucial promise (faithfulness)? CVE pushes us to identify the good God was aiming for.

But here’s the part that messes us up: the Method God commanded (the 'Mode') often involved violence and sounds brutal. This is where CVE urges careful thought, distinguishing the Aim from the Method. Could God have been communicating using language and conventions people understood back then? Ancient warfare accounts often used intense, even exaggerated language (hyperbole) to signal the seriousness and totality of a judgment or victory. Maybe God used this familiar, although harsh, language to show how completely His good aim needed to be achieved?

Furthermore, was the terrible outcome, like non-combatant deaths, God's direct Aim, or was it a tragic side-effect of the Method needed to achieve the essential good Aim in that fallen, ancient world? Think of a surgeon necessarily causing pain (Method) to save a life (Aim). The pain isn't the goal, but an accepted consequence. Considering intent versus foresight is crucial here.

Finally, CVE asks us to consider how does it fit the big picture (the 'Telos')? No biblical event happens in isolation. How does this difficult moment, analyzed through CVE, contribute to God's ultimate, overarching plan to redeem and restore all things through Jesus Christ?

A Quick Look: Applying CVE to Jericho (Joshua 6)

So, does asking these questions actually change how we see a passage? Let's take a quick CVE look at Jericho (Joshua 6). The situation involved Israel finally entering the Promised Land, with Jericho as the symbolic first hurdle. It's a huge moment in God’s plan within the ancient world. What was God's good aim (Target)? The text suggests He aimed to show His faithfulness (promise keeping!), His authority, enacting justice on resistance. And surprisingly, show mercy by saving Rahab based on her faith. All these aims are rooted in God's known character.

How was this achieved (the Method/Mode)? Mostly through a miracle (walls falling!), emphasizing His power. Yes, the Israelites then enacted the herem (devoting all to destruction), and the language sounds total, fitting ANE conventions for complete judgment on a 'first city' dedicated to God. However, CVE reminds us the main action was God's miracle, that the language needs careful reading (possible hyperbole?), and Rahab's inclusion proves the ultimate aim wasn't simply ethnic destruction.

Lastly, how does it fit the big picture (Telos)? Taking the land led toward Jesus, and Rahab, a Canaanite, becoming part of Jesus' lineage powerfully shows God's bigger redemptive plan was always about faith.

Even this quick look, focusing on God's good aims within the specific situation, understanding the method in context, and seeing the big picture, helps us see more than just violence. It points towards a God working out His complex, good purposes.

Moving Beyond Excuses and Errors

You see what happens when we apply these CVE questions? Instead of getting stuck only on the disturbing surface description (Method/Mode), we start peeling back layers. We look for God's good aims (Targets) rooted in His character, understand them within their specific situation, consider how He communicated then, and see how it fits the big picture.

Now, does this make the violence disappear or feel comfortable? No, these are still hard texts describing harsh realities in a fallen world. But it does offer a path to see coherence where before we only saw contradiction. It helps us affirm both God's perfect goodness and the Bible's reliability, moving beyond those dead ends of making flimsy excuses or claiming the Bible is simply wrong about God.

A Path Forward

This CVE approach is just a starting point. It's a framework for thinking and faithfully wrestling with Scripture. It requires careful work, humility, and dependence on the Holy Spirit. But isn't it encouraging to know there are robust, thoughtful ways to explore these passages that don't force us into that impossible choice between our trust in God's character and our trust in His Word? It opens up possibilities for deeper understanding. What other difficult passages might start to make more sense when we focus first on God's good aims?

I hope this introduction gives you a helpful new perspective and a sense of hope. We serve a good God, fully revealed in Jesus, and He invites us to understand Him more deeply, even through the challenging parts of the story He inspired.