Shared ground

Deuteronomy 20:16–18 draws a bright line between warfare against “far off” cities earlier in the chapter and warfare within the land Israel is said to receive as an inheritance. In the inherited-land cities, the text explicitly orders no survivors (“save alive nothing that breathes”) and repeats the order with the stronger phrase “utterly destroy” (utterly). It then names several local people-groups as the focus of this command.

The passage also gives an explicit reason: prevention. The concern is that the remaining populations would “teach” Israel to copy “abominations” connected to their worship, leading Israel to sin against Yahweh. The text frames the danger as religious and moral corruption through learned practices, not merely military risk.

Where interpretation differs

Some readers take “nothing that breathes” as including animals as well as humans; others think the stress is on human populations (especially because v.18 explains the reason in terms of being “taught” practices, which fits human survivors). The text itself does not spell out the boundary.

Some readers treat the listed groups (Hittite, Amorite, etc.) as precise, historically bounded targets; others read the list as a conventional way of referring broadly to the local Canaanite populations in the land, without requiring that every listed identity be present in every location.

Some readers hear “teach you” as organized instruction; others hear it as everyday cultural influence—living next to people whose rituals, stories, and social life would normalize their worship.

Why the disagreement exists

The wording is sweeping (“nothing that breathes,” “utterly destroy”) but the stated purpose focuses on a narrower mechanism (being taught religious practices). That creates a tension: the language sounds total, yet the rationale highlights spiritual influence. Also, the passage gives a list of peoples without clarifying whether it functions like a census of targets or a stock list for “the peoples of the land.”

What this passage clearly contributes

This text presents the conquest of the inherited land as a distinct category with distinct rules, grounded in Yahweh’s command (explicit claim). It links the extreme policy to protecting Israel from adopting local worship practices (explicit claim). Theologically, it depicts Israel’s life in the land as inseparable from exclusive loyalty to Yahweh and shows how seriously the text treats the risk of religious mixing (inference from the stated purpose and the severity of the command).