Biblical violence

Justin Brierley recently moderated a debate between Christian philosopher/ethicist Paul Copan and pacifist/open theist Gregory Boyd:

https://www.premierchristianradio.com/Shows/Saturday/Unbelievable/Episodes/Unbelievable-Greg-Boyd-Paul-Copan-debate-Old-Testament-violence-and-Boyd-s-new-theology-in-Crucifixion-Of-The-Warrior-God

https://www.premierchristianradio.com/Shows/Saturday/Unbelievable/Episodes/Unbelievable-Boyd-Copan-pt-2-debating-Amalekite-destruction-Ananias-and-Sapphira

There's an striking comparison and contrast between the criteria of Gregory Boy and Randal Rauser:

For Rauser, moral intuitions (i.e. his moral intuitions) trump Bible ethics–in case of conflict.

For Boyd, NT ethics (as he construes it) trumps moral intuitions. He admits that pacifism is counterintuitive, but he considers that the cost of discipleship (not that he himself has paid a price). 

Two different ways to be wrong!