sidewinder

I recently read the account of the ten plagues on Egypt in the book of Exodus and I have some questions. It seems the main point of all these plauges is for Yahweh to show his wonders to the Israelites. Yahweh is trying to prove his existence to the Israelites. My question is why does Yahweh do this through these atrocious actions? Furthermore, Pharoah doesn't even have a real chance to let the Israelites go because the text states that Yahweh continually hardens Pharoah's heart so that he won't let the Israelites go. Is it not possible for this all-perfect divine being to prove his existence to the Israelites in many, much less atrocious ways? These are truly the actions of an evil being. It's the portrait of a god who plays puppets with humans arbitrarily and for his own amusement. How any sane person can say that such a being is so loving and cares so much for humans is incomprehensible. Any comments, especially from Christians?

Marduk

The same loving god that created hell! These things never really happened anyway, it's just Iron Age people writing stories about what they thought their god should be doing. "Boy these Egyptians really push us around, they wouldn't do that if superman were here!"

Asha'man

I think it just proves that Yahweh is a bloodthirsty sociopath. What more should we expect?

gilly54

According to the presently ongoing thread concerning the Red Sea parting, there is no historical evidence that the Hebrews were ever slaves in Egypt. I thought that at least THIS was historically true. So, the Israelis formed this Passover/Moses story to do a land grab. No wonder the Arab world is pissed at the US for supporting Israel.

Bruce Wildish

You are applying modern moral standards to an ancient tale written under very different times. It was commonly held by many ancients (and sadly continues to be held by many modern religionists) that God, as creator, was entitled to do as he pleased with his creation and that humans had no right to hold God to account. The idea that it is immoral for God to manipulate humans for His own purposes would never have occured to most ancient writers of religious lore; that is a modern humanistic sentiment.

CX

Agreed. I also find it curious or ironic depending on your perspective how Xians, who rely heavily on connecting the story of Jesus to the history of Israel presented in the bible, seem to ignore or rationalize away the atrocious behavior of YHWH in the OT because it offends their modern sensibilities. Consider the book of Joshua which recounts the Israelite conquest of Canaan. This entire passion play strikes me as very similar to that being played out on the current world stage in the conflict between Islamic fundamentalism and the West.

By the way, Bruce, welcome to II. What I've read from you so far has been very insightful and refreshing. I look forward to seeing more from you.

[ June 13, 2002: Message edited by: CX ]</p>

Jayman

Sidewinder,

I think the plagues can also be seen as a judgment on the Egyptian people for the cruelties that they perpetrated on the Hebrew people. I mean the Egyptians tried to kill off the entire Hebrew race by killing all the males. Since all (1:22) the Egyptians are guilty all the Egyptians deserve to pay.

I agree that Exodus does claim at points that God wants to reveal Himself to the Egyptians, however, it also states that he plans to judge the Egyptians (6:6; 7:4). Furthermore, God does not always harden Pharaoh's heart. During the first plagues Pharaoh is described as hardening his own heart. It's not until the later plagues (not until 9:12) that God is desbribed as hardening Pharaoh's heart. Furthermore, there's an interesting comment by Friedman in Commentary on the Torah on Deut. 5:26.

He translates the passage as follows: "Who would make it so, that they would have such a heart, to fear me and observe all my commandments every day, so it would be good for them and for their children forever!" He then comments on the verse as follows: "I asked in The Hidden Face of God: should God have to ask who when the answer seems so manifestly to be that God Himself could make it so? Even if 'Who would make it so' was a known expression, it still seems inapplicable to God. All the classic English translations reword this verse, eliminating the phrase 'who would make it so,' presumably because it seems so incongruous. But we cannot translate the concept away. It suggests that, in the Torah's conception, even though God makes humans as God sees fit, humans are free thereafter to follow their hearts. God splits seas, makes animals talk, and makes water come from rocks, but God does not change the human heart. This in turn sheds light in retrospect on what God does to Pharaoh's heart during the plagues. English translators have often made it 'God hardened Pharaoh's heart,' but the Hebrew rather means 'God strengthened Pharaoh's heart.' God does not change the king's heart, but only gives the Pharaoh strength to follow his own resolve."

I think your picture of God is therefore wrong. God is seen as a God who rescues the persecuted from the hands of the persecutors. He is seen as a God who judges those who do wrong. He reveals Himself to Egyptians and Hebrews in a way that judges the Egyptians and saves the Hebrews.

Note, this reply is purely from the text of Exodus and does not take into consideration the historical plausibility of the story. Therefore, if you critique my post please critique it from the text of Exodus only.

Undercurrent

Even the neonate first-born son of an Egyptian peasent? What crimes had the first-born sons of Egypt perpetrated against the Jews? Face it -- The story plainly tells of innocent children being killed to punish the parents, with the god of Moses showing callous disregard for the lives of the children involved.

m.

Jayman

I agree that it causes problems when you try to think about it as a historical story. It's similar to the problem of Noah's flood. The Bible says that all of flesh was corrupt (Gen. 6:11-12), but if we take the story to be a historical account we find it hard to believe that everybody but Noah was corrupt.

That's why I wanted to stress at the end of my last post that I was arguing from the text alone. The text claims everyone is guilty and therefore God has a right to judge them - in the story not in real-life.

Foxhole Atheist

Jayman:

If you would heed the post of gilly54, you may wish to do some research in this regard.

Archeological investigations within the areas that Exodus was suppose to have taken place have found no evidence that Exodus is anything more than mythical. The bible indicates that there were some 600,000 men of fighting age that were a part of the Hebrew contingent that left Egypt at the time of the Exodus. If this is the case, then a total population of somewhere around 2,000,000 people must have been involved. This, of course, would include women and children plus men not of fighting age. Egypt itself, the Sinai Peninsular and the Eastern Mediterranean to present day Jordan and Syria have turned-up nothing of such a vast group of people wandering for 40 years.

Additionally, Egyptian records that date much earlier than the old testament have shown a chronological continuation with no mention of vast numbers of Hebrews in bondage, any individual by the name of Moses, an emigration of a vast number of people previously in residence in Egypt, nor of any of the plagues as mentioned in the bible.

The point being, Exodus is totally mythical. It is a story written by the Hebrew clergy in an effort to inspire the people of their culture and give them a historical base for which they adhere to the will of their god, according to the word as presented by said clergy.

As modern day archeologists continue to search for a plausible basis for the stories contained within the bible, they are concluding that the bible is a book of myths and is not even a historically accurate accounting the tribes of Israel.