Destruction Essential.--We are not to suppose, however, that the Lord delights in war--that He prefers it to peace; or that he would have aught to do with strife and devastation, if his good and wise purposes could always be accomplished by other and milder means. But if strife becomes necessary, and destruction essential, as when an old building is torn down to make room for a new one, and if the All-wise be the doer or director of the deed, who can question its rightfulness? "Shall the axe boast itself against him that heweth therewith? Or shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it?" [7] Wars Decreed.--"I have sworn in my wrath and decreed wars upon the face of the earth, and the wicked shall slay the wicked." [8] So says the Almighty to his servant Joseph. And there lies the problem in a nutshell. God has "decreed wars"--decreed them for a purpose. Human iniquity brings down divine retribution, and the wicked are permitted to slay one another--partly as a punishment for their sins, but mainly to help clear the way for a higher and better order of things. Just and Unjust Wars.--Michael and the Dragon.--Some wars are righteous and just; others wrong and unjust. All depends upon the purpose for which they are waged, and whether or not the Lord sanctions them. All unrighteous wars are the work of Satan and his minions. But all wars are not unrighteous. When Michael and his angels fought against the Dragon, and overcame him, [9] surely the fight was a righteous one on Michael's part. As for the provocation--that springs another question. It is undoubtedly true that there would have been no "war in heaven," if Lucifer had not rebelled; but, having rebelled, he had to be put down, and a righteous war was waged for that purpose. The conduct of those who make such wars necessary, is not to be compared with the acts of those who rise up to vindicate right and vanquish wrong. Agnostic Arguments.--Joshua's conquest of Canaan--let us consider that. [10] Agnostic writers, taking the view that all such wars are wicked, affect to regard this event as a grave crime. They brand Joshua as a murderer, and charge Jehovah with being a violator of his own statutes--a greater murderer, in short, who, after punishing the first slayer of his fellow man, the fratricidal Cain, [11] and laying down the law to Noah, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed." [12]--emphasizing it later with the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill" [13]--directed the general of his armies to commit wholesale slaughter and extermination. Therefore was he a murderer and a lawbreaker. Such is the logic of Robert G. Ingersoll and other writers of his class.