Question regarding the 10th plague of Egypt

  • Thread starter Thread starter jtodisco
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jtodisco

Guest
I just want to begin this post by making it very clear that I am pro-life.

With that said, I had a rather random thought pop into my head recently (and I’m sure I can’t be the first to wonder about this). I was thinking about how awful abortion is and strongly regretting that when I was younger I worked for an organization that was openly supportive of abortions, contraceptives, etc. when suddenly the 10th plague of Egypt came into my thoughts. I sat there wondering what I would say to someone who is pro-choice if they tried to use that portion of Scripture against me in an argument. To do so would clearly be an abuse of Scripture and a gross misinterpretation, but my simply stating that would likely not be enough to satisfy a potential opponent.

So my question is how do we explain this episode in Bible history? In other places in Scripture children and infants may be killed, but as far as I know this always happens at the hands of men not God. But in Exodus the 10th plague is supposed to be God’s punishment of the Egyptians and that punishment is explicitly the killing of an entire city’s innocent firstborn babies and children.

This story has always caused problems for me, even though I try to focus on its larger metaphorical meaning as relates to liberation from sin, etc. But now I feel like I really have to get some sound clarification on this because it’s really bothering me. 😦

Thanks in advance to those of you who can give me some clarity on this matter.
 
God is God in the end. He can do as He wills, and nothing He does is evil or unjust. Remember, none are innocent in His sight. Even children, who have the stain of original sin. The teaching of the Church even goes as far as to say that we cannot know that unbaptized children are in heaven. St Augustine once taught that unbaptized children merit eternal damnation[but to the lightest degree], because not even children are worthy of eternal life due to original sin. The 10th plague was a judgment of God upon a stiffnecked and rebellious nation. Sometimes, others suffer in the judgments of God upon a nation. When God unleashed His wrath upon Israel, women and young perished in it too. God ordered the destruction of all, including women and children, during the Israelite conquest of Canaan. In the end, God is God, God is just, God will execute wrath and judgment as He pleases. It does not make it ok for us as mere human beings to murder the unborn as we whim. It does not detract from the gravity of the mortal sin of abortion. Thats my .02 😛
 
God is sovereign over human death, including when the human being in question is a baby. Babies, after all, die naturally every day, or are miscarried, and God is sovereign there, too.

We are NOT sovereign over human death. There are situations when ending a human life is morally permitted, such as self defense or national defense, and some would include state execution in this category, as well. But we are never permitted to kill the innocent, of which abortion is the most egregious example.

ICXC NIKA
 
jtodisco said:
I just want to begin this post by making it very clear that I am pro-life.

With that said, I had a rather random thought pop into my head recently (and I’m sure I can’t be the first to wonder about this). I was thinking about how awful abortion is and strongly regretting that when I was younger I worked for an organization that was openly supportive of abortions, contraceptives, etc. when suddenly the 10th plague of Egypt came into my thoughts. I sat there wondering what I would say to someone who is pro-choice if they tried to use that portion of Scripture against me in an argument. To do so would clearly be an abuse of Scripture and a gross misinterpretation, but my simply stating that would likely not be enough to satisfy a potential opponent.

So my question is how do we explain this episode in Bible history? In other places in Scripture children and infants may be killed, but as far as I know this always happens at the hands of men not God. But in Exodus the 10th plague is supposed to be God’s punishment of the Egyptians and that punishment is explicitly the killing of an entire city’s innocent firstborn babies and children.

This story has always caused problems for me, even though I try to focus on its larger metaphorical meaning as relates to liberation from sin, etc. But now I feel like I really have to get some sound clarification on this because it’s really bothering me. 😦

Thanks in advance to those of you who can give me some clarity on this matter.
Click to expand...
Hi Jtodisco, I would frame your question around the death of the first born as a type of typology. Violent death of the first man (sin) Adam…and a violent death of the first born of all creation… Jesus. and in between Adam and Jesus a violent death of another first born that of the “enemy” the Egyptians. So can you see there is a death of the first born as created by God (not enemy or different type of enemy) , death of the first born (of the enemy) and death of the Divine first born to atone for the other two deaths of the first born.
Did I do that well or are you more confused than I am at the moment. 🙂
 
We oppose killing human beings by human beings. This is based on the truth that no human being has the power to cause life to exist.
Killing is terminating life. Termination of life may legitimately done only by its owner, the One who also can give it. No human being, as we have written above, cannot give life. (Or do you want to show proof of a human being who has created another human being?) It is only God who created human life and therefore its owner.
If God kills as a punishment, He has full rights to do so. If He wishes to create a new life inside a woman’s body, who will object without getting His ire?
God sent the 10th plague in Egypt and He had full rights to do so. He is the owner of life.
Some people conspired to terminate a pregnancy and they get the ire of the author of life.

Hopefully, this is a help.
 
roads152 said:
We oppose killing human beings by human beings. This is based on the truth that no human being has the power to cause life to exist.
Killing is terminating life. Termination of life may legitimately done only by its owner, the One who also can give it. No human being, as we have written above, cannot give life. (Or do you want to show proof of a human being who has created another human being?) It is only God who created human life and therefore its owner.
If God kills as a punishment, He has full rights to do so. If He wishes to create a new life inside a woman’s body, who will object without getting His ire?
God sent the 10th plague in Egypt and He had full rights to do so. He is the owner of life.
Some people conspired to terminate a pregnancy and they get the ire of the author of life.

Hopefully, this is a help.
Click to expand...
Excuse me but I have worked in pro life (as a catholic) for 24 years so dont even think of telling me about pro life and right to life etc. I have today written a paper for publication on the grief of the abortive woman and why so back off!!! I was respondoing to question at a theological level
And your theology about Life and God etc is faulty. Your kind of “god” is not the one I recognise.

And no your answer has not been of help.
 
I thank everyone for their responses thus far.

I must confess though that I am a little disappointed that the consensus seems to be “God can do whatever He wants with what He’s made. So it’s ok that God killed babies in ancient Egypt.” I mean, I get it. I do believe God is the Creator of all life and that He can do as He pleases. He is the Divine Potter and we vessels cannot argue with our Maker.

At the same time though, I am used to God’s decisions making a little more sense. God created reason after all. Along with wisdom, justice, mercy, etc. I do not doubt that God’s decision in Egypt was just and wise and good. But I had hoped that someone would be able to give me an explanation of how this action was good. Again, I know that God is Goodness itself and that all of His actions are right. I do not question this.

I also know that God is beyond our understanding and that He can be mysterious. And that sometimes we won’t get the answers we seek until we leave this world. But in an episode so important in salvation history you would think God would grant us the ability to draw more understanding from it than simply reminding us that God is All-Powerful.

I do recognize though that there is an obvious difference between a human being ending the life of another human being and of God ending the life of a human being. I just feel there must be more to it than that, God is not arbitrary in His actions after all.
 
Grace_Angel said:
Hi Jtodisco, I would frame your question around the death of the first born as a type of typology. Violent death of the first man (sin) Adam…and a violent death of the first born of all creation… Jesus. and in between Adam and Jesus a violent death of another first born that of the “enemy” the Egyptians. So can you see there is a death of the first born as created by God (not enemy or different type of enemy) , death of the first born (of the enemy) and death of the Divine first born to atone for the other two deaths of the first born.
Did I do that well or are you more confused than I am at the moment. 🙂
Click to expand...
I think I have some understanding of what you’re trying to express, though I’d be lying if I said I am certain I understand you 100% correctly.

I think that being able to understand the symbolic meaning of events in the Bible, especially how the Old Testament prepares for and reveals Christ, is extremely important. However, I agree with the Biblical scholars when they claim that there are two different levels of reading Scripture: the literal and the spiritual. And that the spiritual is then broken down into: the allegorical, the moral, and the anagogical senses. And I can see many spiritual interpretations for the events that took place when the Israelites were being liberated from Egypt.

But what I’m looking for in regards to the 10th plague is more related to the literal, since this is a real event and these were real people. It would seem tragic to think that masses of people were created by God only so He could send future generations a moral lesson. That would imply some sort of determinism that would almost deny free will to those who were created just to be instruments of Divine wrath and to teach us a lesson in the future.

It may just be that the answer to this particular question can only be satisfactorily answered by God Himself. In which case I will hopefully have a long time to wait before I get my answer. 😛
 
jtodisco said:
I think I have some understanding of what you’re trying to express, though I’d be lying if I said I am certain I understand you 100% correctly.

I think that being able to understand the symbolic meaning of events in the Bible, especially how the Old Testament prepares for and reveals Christ, is extremely important. However, I agree with the Biblical scholars when they claim that there are two different levels of reading Scripture: the literal and the spiritual. And that the spiritual is then broken down into: the allegorical, the moral, and the anagogical senses. And I can see many spiritual interpretations for the events that took place when the Israelites were being liberated from Egypt.

But what I’m looking for in regards to the 10th plague is more related to the literal, since this is a real event and these were real people. It would seem tragic to think that masses of people were created by God only so He could send future generations a moral lesson. That would imply some sort of determinism that would almost deny free will to those who were created just to be instruments of Divine wrath and to teach us a lesson in the future.

It may just be that the answer to this particular question can only be satisfactorily answered by God Himself. In which case I will hopefully have a long time to wait before I get my answer. 😛
Click to expand...
Sorry I didnt make myself clearer but i am still able to see (in my head) the typology of this dying of the first born. To me it seems clear. death introduced by Adam (first created) through sin. Death reversed through the first born Jesus and in between death of the first born of the enemy…death itself. “death is swallowed up in victory allellujah” Vigil of Easter . God defeats “death” by entering into a way by which death could be defeated. He defeats death both spiritually and physically.
Yeahhhh did I do better this time:blush:
 
I understand how Adam relates to Christ and vice versa. Saint Paul makes the connection very clear. However, there is never any mention of Egypt (or anyone else) as a “middle” figure. I mean, wouldn’t all death fall under this death of the enemy type you’re referring to? Or at least all death from Adam until Christ? Death itself is an evil and a result of sin and is only conquered by Christ. Also, the kinds of death don’t seem to match up well in this interpretation. Adam’s death was through sin and he brought it upon himself (with help from the serpent, of course), Christ’s death was sacrificial (Christ choose to lay His life down, no one took it from Him), but the death of the Egyptian firstborn was imposed. God struck them down through His angel on the first Passover. The firstborn of the pharaoh, the firstborn of every peasant, the firstborn even of the various animals in Egypt.

I do not doubt that God could so order things that all of these firstborn would be worthy of such a punishment, but it would seem like in order to make that the case there again would have to be a suspension of free will. And I know that there’s “no such thing as innocent” in that we all bear the stain of original sin and also all the sins we commit afterward, so that even infants who are not baptized are fallen like the rest of humanity. But why kill the infants (the closest thing we have to innocence) before they ever had a chance to live their lives for God or against Him? What is the point of allowing them to be born only to destroy them?
 
jtodisco said:
I understand how Adam relates to Christ and vice versa. Saint Paul makes the connection very clear. However, there is never any mention of Egypt (or anyone else) as a “middle” figure. I mean, wouldn’t all death fall under this death of the enemy type you’re referring to? Or at least all death from Adam until Christ? Death itself is an evil and a result of sin and is only conquered by Christ. Also, the kinds of death don’t seem to match up well in this interpretation. Adam’s death was through sin and he brought it upon himself (with help from the serpent, of course), Christ’s death was sacrificial (Christ choose to lay His life down, no one took it from Him), but the death of the Egyptian firstborn was imposed. God struck them down through His angel on the first Passover. The firstborn of the pharaoh, the firstborn of every peasant, the firstborn even of the various animals in Egypt.

I do not doubt that God could so order things that all of these firstborn would be worthy of such a punishment, but it would seem like in order to make that the case there again would have to be a suspension of free will. And I know that there’s “no such thing as innocent” in that we all bear the stain of original sin and also all the sins we commit afterward, so that even infants who are not baptized are fallen like the rest of humanity. But why kill the infants (the closest thing we have to innocence) before they ever had a chance to live their lives for God or against Him? What is the point of allowing them to be born only to destroy them?
Click to expand...
Jtodisco, you seem very distressed over this, dont be please because God is Justice itself. The “Egyptian” is a symbol. Remember Egypt has been both an enslaver of the Hebrew People and a saver of Jesus and Mary and Joseph.
In my studies I have always understood “the firstborn” as a reference to first Adam, then over Adam Jesus. Remember Pharaoh was sent many signs from God via Moses and the Israelites but he chose to be “PHaraoh” who ordered that the babies of the Jews under 2 years of age be murdered at the time of Jesus. There were many first borns there too.
I am happy to see the “Egyptians” as a type of death and God destroyed that in Jesus through the Ressurrection.
Infants have always borne the brunt of our sinful nature. Infants because as you say and aas it is they are the closest visible sign to innocence that we have.
Looking at today globally about 40-50 million infants per year perish at the hands of modern “Pharaohs” there are many many first borns being killed today. and like days of past not much of a wimper here. Yes some noises but no sign of easing. “Pharaoh” is again killing children but the sadness is that the mothers and fathers this time are giving “Pharaoh” the children to kill.
Anyway have a good day
 
Well, in the beginning of Exodus the Hebrew children are put to death. In the OT there is an eye for ane eye doctrine. So, God gave a fair punishment.

Im not sure if my answer is right or not 😦
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top