The word rendered _backs_, is in the original, _necks_, and the passage _may_ mean, I will make all your enemies turn their necks unto you; that is, be _subject to you as tributaries_, become _denationalized_, their civil polity, state organization, political existence, _destroyed_--their idolatrous temples, altars, images, groves, and all heathen rites _destroyed_; in a word, their whole system, national, political, civil, and religious, subverted, and the whole people _put under tribute_. Again; if these commands required the unconditional destruction of all the _individuals_ of the Canaanites, the Mosaic law was at war with itself, for the directions relative to the treatment of native residents and sojourners, form a large part of it. "The stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself." "If thy brother be waxen poor, thou shalt relieve him, yea, though he be a _stranger or a sojourner_, that he may live with thee." "Thou shalt not oppress a _stranger_." "Thou shalt not vex a _stranger_." "Judge righteously between every, man and his brother, and the _stranger_ that is with him." "Ye shall not respect persons in judgement." "Ye shall have one manner of law as well for the _stranger_, as for him of your own country." We find, also, that provision was made for them in the cities of refuge. Num. xxxv. 15--the gleanings of the harvest and vintage were assigned to them, Lev. xix. 9, 10, and xxiii. 22, and 25, 6;--the blessings of the Sabbath, theirs, Ex. xx. 10;--the privilege of offering sacrifices secured, Lev. 22. 18; and stated religious instruction provided for them. Deut. xxxi. 9, 12. Now, does this _same law_ authorize and appoint the _individual extermination_ of those very persons, whose lives and general interests it so solicitously protects? These laws were given to the Israelites, long _before_ they entered Canaan; and they must of necessity have inferred from them, that a multitude of the inhabitants of the land would _continue in it_, under their government. 3. _We argue that these commands did not require the_ INDIVIDUAL _destruction of the Canaanites unconditionally, from the fact that the most pious Israelites never seem to have so regarded them._ Joshua was selected as the leader of Israel to execute God's threatenings upon Canaan. He had no _discretionary_ power. God's commands were his _official instructions._ Going _beyond_ them would have been usurpation; refusing _to carry them out,_ rebellion and treason. For not obeying, in _every particular,_ and in a _single_ instance, God's command respecting the Amalekites, Saul was rejected from being king.