Is this me, or the main narrative is a tad confuse in the ''Exodus'' ?

[BaronNoir]

(There is a fairly obvious reason why this topic came to me, and this is ''what pass as Easter movies nowadays. Apparently, The Scorpion King counts.)

I figured out this was best in the history thread.

For such an important story, it always struck me as a bit confuse as narrative goes.

The LORD show how powerful he is : okay.

But why Pharaoh is sometimes hardening his resolves against the Israelites and in other times the LORD does it ? (Why is not to poke fun at an eventual ''plot hole''-it's to ask if there is a theological explanation about this. Cause the bit about hardening and getting harder seems pretty important seeing how it's keep repeated-to have more reference about hardening, you would either need a Ken Burns documentary on cement or a porn movie)

 

[Abdul Goatherd]

No, it is not just you. It is something which has puzzled theologians from the beginning.

As to the hardening, it is not random, but escalating. The first six plagues the Pharaoh hardens on his own. He needs a little help only from the seventh onwards. Evidently God didn't want his demonstrations to be over so quickly. Dunno why. Maybe he really needed the last four to make the point of his awesomeness, and Pharaoh wavering would spoil it.

St. Paul himself referred to this hardening, and just concluded "God works in weird ways".

By contrast, after going over it a bit (tossing in some predestination stuff), Augustine seems to want to put it down to a typo. i.e. that "I harden" ("ego indurabo") should probably be read as "I demonstrate how hard it is" ("quam durum sit demonstrabo"). (Aug)

 

[demanvanwezel]

I've learned that it's due to the differences in narrative

in the first versions under the independant israeli kingdom it was just that the pharao's heart hardened, no mention of god doing it, also moses split the red sea by himself

it was during the exile in babylon that the mentions of god hardening the pharao's heart and also that god acted through moses and thus split the red sea

it's almost as if people want to believe in times of good that they did all of it themselves and that i bad times there must be some kind of divine plan behind it

 

[Abdul Goatherd]

I've learned that it's due to the differences in narrative

in the first versions under the independant israeli kingdom it was just that the pharao's heart hardened, no mention of god doing it, also moses split the red sea by himself

it was during the exile in babylon that the mentions of god hardening the pharao's heart and also that god acted through moses and thus split the red sea

it's almost as if people want to believe in times of good that they did all of it themselves and that i bad times there must be some kind of divine plan behind it

You have a pre-Biblical source?

I am not sure how the "old version" might have been, but looking into it some more, it seems certainly the final version of all the plagues seems to be composed with a conscious literary effect, i.e. to give a sense of escalation to its climax (the slaughter of the Egyptian first born).

The whole writing of the plagues work in a crescendo format. The Egyptian magicians could replicate the early plagues, but soon are at a loss, and towards the end change sides. Similarly, Pharaoh is dismissive at first, then hardens, then wavers in fear. Similarly, both Moses's demands and Pharaoh's concessions inch upwards. The plagues also narrow their targets (first three plague affect everyone, then Egyptians only, then mainly unbelieving Egyptians). So there is a sense of growing apprehension of where all this is going. God is orchestrating something huge.

Indeed, there is a repetitive format in the plagues, like a rhythm. You'll notice God's instructions to Moses are not the same every time, but are organized in groups of three (1) Go to Pharaoh in the morning, and give warning (bloody nile), (2) Go to Pharaoh (not in the morning) and give warning (frogs), (3) Don't go to Pharaoh, don't warn, just unleash plague (gnats). The instruction pattern is exactly the same for the next trio (flies, lifestock, boils), and once again for the final trio (hail, locusts, darkness). Then the climax comes (firstborn).

(for those who never read it: Exodus 7:14ff)

So at least it seems the Biblical writers were quite consciously using a literary device for escalation, not simply rattling off a long list of plagues, but using all the plagues in a mounting crescendo. And a weakening Pharaoh's resolve is part of that. If the Pharaoh has the same stubborn indifferent reaction 9 times in a row, then suddenly changes his mind in the tenth, the whole list seems too boring and the climax too abrupt.

Indeed, a sudden change of mind might make it appear as if it was Pharaoh's royal whim, not God's awesomeness, that finally released them. And Israelites would be thanking the Pharaoh's emancipation declaration rather than thanking God.

 

[ShoGuL]

Why is this discussion of fiction in the history forum?

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

You really think a Hollywood epic made in 2014 is remotely concerned with the theological arguments involved?

The thing is entirely unwatchable - I gave up after five minutes, just like that Noah travesty - let alone unfathomable.

 

[Imgran]

Why is this discussion of fiction in the history forum?

Wait, so does that mean we have to delete all the alt-history threads? This would be a pretty bare forum if we did that!

Even if the Bible was fictional, why would that necessarily preclude discussion in a history forum? Would you question The Epic of Gilgamesh if it appeared here?

These are works of mythology and history and an important historical cornerstone of Jewish, Islamic and Western Christian culture, Entirely appropriate to discuss them here, no matter what book they appear in. If you let your absurd antireligious bias blind you to understanding the Bible as a historically and culturally significant work, your outlook of history will be skewed and incorrect as a result..

 

[Abdul Goatherd]

Wait, so does that mean we have to delete all the alt-history threads?

Pretty please?

 

[Graf Zeppelin]

Isnt the bible several books thrown into the mixer ? I mean there is even stuff in there from times when the Israelis been polytheistic.

Anyway for this whole Moses/Egypt thing always sounds like a daring story an escaped slave tells the people when he made it home.Some Münchausen of the uhm I dunno.

 

[BaronNoir]

You really think a Hollywood epic made in 2014 is remotely concerned with the theological arguments involved?

The thing is entirely unwatchable - I gave up after five minutes, just like that Noah travesty - let alone unfathomable.

I meant the book of Exodus...

 

[Graf Zeppelin]

I meant the book of Exodus...

The book to the film ? O.O

 

[Imgran]

Isnt the bible several books thrown into the mixer ? I mean there is even stuff in there from times when the Israelis been polytheistic.

Give a specific reference to that please, I'd be interested to hear it. I'm more or less familiar with the modern Bible, and I can't see where that shows up anywhere.

Anyway for this whole Moses/Egypt thing always sounds like a daring story an escaped slave tells the people when he made it home.Some Münchausen of the uhm I dunno.

Except the Exodus is about an entire people fleeing from another kingdom and eventually conquering and founding their own. Which is historically quite plausible since this happened several times throughout history. Even if you take the stories of literal miracles with a grain of salt, the fundamental narrative of the Exodus is pretty solid. We know that there's a strong Egyptian inflience in Hebrew society and technology. We know that this kind of migration was very common in the Middle East throughout history, from the Sea Peoples to the Phoenecians to the Greeks to the Turks, there's a vast history of exactly the kind of migration as the Hebrews describe.

Effectively the deep story of the Exodus is an Egyptian nation that exploited the Hebrew people with slavery and forced labor, then through a series of catastrophes lost control of their Hebrew slaves, who escaped, lived for a period of time as a nomadic people, and invaded and conquered a space for themselves in the Middle East. Is that really so different from what the Turks did centuries later?

Now personally as a Christian, I believe in the mythological stuff too, but that certainly doesn't change the histprical significance of plausibility of the story of Exodus. Discussion of this Biblical book belongs in a historical forum

 

[Graf Zeppelin]

Give a specific reference to that please, I'd be interested to hear it. I'm more or less familiar with the modern Bible, and I can't see where that shows up anywhere.

Uff been awhile. I will have a look.


I however agree that discussion of biblical stuff belongs to the history forum.

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

I meant the book of Exodus...

I assume you are not discussing the novel by Leon Uris, or the movie of the same name.

You have to take a step back and remember the Patriarchy. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Joseph was the son of Jacob and his new wife, and sold into the land of Egypt by his jealous brothers. In Egypt, he has humble beginnings but rises to Pharoah's side by his ability to interpret Pharoah's dream of seven years of plenty and seven years of famine.

During the time of famine, Joseph's brothers come to Egypt to buy grain because their fields are also empty. Through his machinations, Joseph has his brothers return to Egypt to settle with his father and all their flocks and herds. In Egpyt they are treated with honor by Pharaoh, until one of his successors comes to the throne and considers them not valuable members of the community but slaves. But, in Egypt, Pharaoh is god and everyone is his slave. Everyone.

Moses kills an Egyptian and runs away. In exile, he has a religious experience and is charged by God with bringing the Hebrews to the Holy Mountain to receive his instruction.

Returning to Egypt, there is a faceoff. On one side is Pharoah, a living god, who represents the Pantheon of Egypt. On the other is The Living God. The plagues are a series of attacks against the pantheon of Egypt itself. In the end, the death of the firstborn of each house results in Pharaoh commanding the Hebrews to leave, who were Passed Over by painting the blood of a slaughtered lamb on their doorways.

The Bible is a story of God's Creation, and within His multi-verse there are beings far less powerful than He and far more ancient and powerful than Mankind. So the question becomes to whom was God demonstrating His power as this story unfolds; us, them, or all of the above.

 

[Arilou]

Give a specific reference to that please, I'd be interested to hear it. I'm more or less familiar with the modern Bible, and I can't see where that shows up anywhere.

Well, the Bible is obviously a mix of several different books: It's even divided as such. (genesis, Deuteronomy, Exodus, Numbers, on so forth and so forth) with different composition dates and different purpose. Some books also seems to be combinations of different stuff (like the famous double creation narrative in Genesis)

 

[Imgran]

Well, the Bible is obviously a mix of several different books: It's even divided as such. (genesis, Deuteronomy, Exodus, Numbers, on so forth and so forth) with different composition dates and different purpose. Some books also seems to be combinations of different stuff (like the famous double creation narrative in Genesis)

I think these are not necessarily contradictory. Exodus is a book of Moses, Moses is believed to have had revelation about the creation. There was also a creation myth carried with the Hebrews from before Moses' revelation. Would it be so crazy if, scribe in the Egyptian tradition that he was, he simply included both stories?

Remember the books of Moses were about imparting the history and culture of the Hebrews to the future, as well as faith and doctrine. I think in that kind of context a scribe errs on the side of leaving things in, including the original Hebrew creation myth

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

I think these are not necessarily contradictory. Exodus is a book of Moses, Moses is believed to have had revelation about the creation. There was also a creation myth carried with the Hebrews from before Moses' revelation. Would it be so crazy if, scribe in the Egyptian tradition that he was, he simply included both stories?

Remember the books of Moses were about imparting the history and culture of the Hebrews to the future, as well as faith and doctrine. I think in that kind of context a scribe errs on the side of leaving things in, including the original Hebrew creation myth

What is interesting is the extreme amount of research done on the Pentateuch and the entire Bible itself, Old and New Testament, especailly the Old as it is shared so liberally. Every scrap of paper found is introduced and coallated into the whole, with footnotes galore.

 

[Arilou]

I think these are not necessarily contradictory. Exodus is a book of Moses, Moses is believed to have had revelation about the creation. There was also a creation myth carried with the Hebrews from before Moses' revelation. Would it be so crazy if, scribe in the Egyptian tradition that he was, he simply included both stories?

Remember the books of Moses were about imparting the history and culture of the Hebrews to the future, as well as faith and doctrine. I think in that kind of context a scribe errs on the side of leaving things in, including the original Hebrew creation myth

I'm not saying they are neccessarily contradictory (though there are parts that do seem to contradict each other) but simply that it seems like they are amalgamations of different traditions. (where those traditions come from, why they were collected together, the decisions the editors made, etc. are all a different story)

 

[Abdul Goatherd]

Give a specific reference to that please, I'd be interested to hear it. I'm more or less familiar with the modern Bible, and I can't see where that shows up anywhere.

You're not familiar with the "Documentary hypothesis" or the German "historical-critical school" of Biblical philology? Worth looking up.

We've touched some of these points before in earlier threads, e.g.

Egyptian enslavement of the Hebrews?
The Biblical God - Revolution or Evolution?

which you might enjoy looking over.

 

[Rich Oliver]

For large periods of time from 3000BC onwards were not Judah and Israel part of the Egyptian empire? Is it not therefore a strong possibility that the original Israelite aristocracy / priesthood were Egyptians. At a later point as Judah and Israel diverged into a separate cultural / political entity or entities, the Exodus story would be invented / developed to explain away the aristocracies residual Egyptianness.