Was God being evil when He killed all the firstborn in Egypt?

[paxomatic]

OP, It seems your wife needs a better answers than God cannot do evil (which is true) so I’ll try to give you one that she may understand better.

From a **human **stand point God rains a punishment down on the innocent little ones, strikes these children down, kills them, leaves their lifeless little bodies to decay in the sands of Egypt. (and I’m sure this imagery is what upsets your wife).

From **Gods **point of view he simply called them home to himself, leaving their temporary shell of this world behind as a punishment to the Egyptians.

If she believes at all in God and the concept of heaven, she has to see that this is not a punishment on the children (who get to forego all the pain and trouble of this world and proceed directly to the Father) but on the parents.

The problem you will have is getting past the knee jerk emotional reaction, but try to get her to see what is taking place from Gods POV instead of ours, and she might find some peace with this passage

Thankyou also, this exactly the kind of discussion I am after. How do you speak to a person whose point of view directly impacts the spiritual formation of your own children and yet who shifts with the wind, theologically. Very frustrating. Yes, pray, Yes hope, yes be strong. But what is the best approach in practical terms.

 

[DeOppressoLiber]

Thankyou also, this exactly the kind of discussion I am after. How do you speak to a person whose point of view directly impacts the spiritual formation of your own children and yet who shifts with the wind, theologically. Very frustrating. Yes, pray, Yes hope, yes be strong. But what is the best approach in practical terms.

The best approach? Well a lot of that depends on you and what type of comunicator you are. A lot will depend on your wife.

If this is an emotional response from her (as I suspect it is) you have to get her to take a step away from her emotional stance and look at the reality of the situation, not her feelings on the situation.

This can be tricky to do, as some people will reject what you’re trying to say all the more, because they feel as if you’re being robotic trying to rely on cold logic, and trying to make them be as “cold and unfeeling” as you.

I recomend trying to ease people into seeing the light through their own discovery. Rather than just trying to tell her what is going on in this verse, ask her questions about it. If you’re skillful in trying to get her to answer from God’s point of view, somewhere in the conversation she will likely “get it”.

WARNING WARNING!!!
In most cases like this, when a person with a strong emotion on the subject see’s the light, they don’t want to admit it.

You’ll know when it happens. They usually sputter in the middle of an answer, get a funny look in their eye, then plow right ahead with what they were saying before. Don’t try to hammer it home right then, just drop the conversation.

It generally takes a few days for them to reassess this view that does not compute with what they’ve believed for so long. They have to come to terms with that and reevaluate their stance. If you continue on them in this time it’s counter productive, and their pride gets in the way. Let it drop and they’ll probably come to you in a few days and go “you know I been thinking…” then they claim the revelation as all their own:thumbsup:

I hope this helps, and I hope my wife doesn’t read this… I’ve been using this strategy on her for years

 

[patg]

Isn’t it far more probable that some disease or bug (like E Coli or Salmonella) affected many Egyptian children and the story tellers who started the story (which was eventually written down in the bible) attributed this event to God as something done to directly help them? After all, the story does not state that only the first born were affected. And the Egyptian children who died probably had very different food sources and environments than the Jewish children.

A simple explanation like this could easily have developed into the legend which was eventually written down.

 

[simspt]

Isn’t it far more probable that some disease or bug (like E Coli or Salmonella) affected many Egyptian children and the story tellers who started the story (which was eventually written down in the bible) attributed this event to God as something done to directly help them? After all, the story does not state that only the first born were affected. And the Egyptian children who died probably had very different food sources and environments than the Jewish children.

A simple explanation like this could easily have developed into the legend which was eventually written down.

Anything is more probable than a miracle. Which ones do you think have the most veracity in the bible if any apart from the resurrection?

 

[Cormacnl]

It comes down to Divine Command Theory: anything God does (visiting plagues on uncooperative peoples or commanding the Jews to wipe out all Canaanites, including all their children) is morally good. I can’t say this idea does not appeal to me.

If God were to kill all Muslim newborns tomorrow, or was to order Catholics to carry out the act on his behalf would we have to accept that was the morally right thing to do?

Claiming God commanded the deaths of lots of children, the starting of a war or genocide is perverse. I believe this sort of argument leads to justification for horrendous crimes such as flying planes into skyscrapers.

Trying to justify it further by saying the victims committed atrocities too (as in the case of the Egyptians or Canaanites) is a feeble argument that should only be used on a school playground.

Isn’t it more likely that the stories about the plagues in Egypt were made up by pious but misguided scribes? Same for the story of God ordering the Jews to wipe out all the Canaanites?

I have heard some Christian scholars concede this is a possibility. Taking this route does not automatically invalidate other claims in the Bible. Indeed, it would leave the idea of a loving creator untarnished.

I, for one, will never accept that killing children to achieve a political or religious aim is ever justified or morally right.

 

[fred_conty]

We know that the Israelites lived in a seperate part of Egypt by themselves, at least from what I have read. We do not know under what conditions they lived, but as slaves, it probably was not in alienment with human rights. They had no social security, hospitals, welfare, military, and income was doubtful if at all.

Basically they slept, eat, worked, under the watchful eye of the Egyptians, who considered them fee construction workers. The conditions were probably terrible. Moses found a guard whipping a woman and killed the guard. So it couldn’t have been good. How many of these people were dieing because of these conditions, especially children and the old, the grandparents. I know I would not have wanted to trade places with them. It was a miserable life, monotenous and tedious and boring.

In these conditions the people turn to God and ask God to rescue them. Their prayer is heard, and Moses then begins his interviews with Pharoah asking for their release. In the world at that time, slavery was a common thing. And Pharoah in no way was going to give up his free help without a struggle. So Moses then, one by one, inflicted the 9 plagues, asking after each one for Pharoah to release the people, which was answered in the negative. So then what Pharoah was saying was that he will never, never, never, give release to them. So what was going to impress Pharoah enough to make him change his mind?

And this is the reason for the 10th plague, the death of the firstborn. It was only after all else failed that this was initiated. Pharoah had his chance to avoid this over and over. He had plenty of warnings, and impressive ones at that. Moses and God did their part. Nothing would shake Pharoah, except his immediate family, his loved ones. This was not forced on him, he was impressively warned, and now the consequences of his refusal fall back on his shoulders which brings about this terrible episode of death.

If only…

Just a consideration.

.

 

[Cormacnl]

Sorry, but that is the type of justification for an atrocity is one should only expect from a bully: you made my God do it…you started it…so my God killed your children. Ta Da!

It is a bad story that leads to bad moral conclusions.

 

[steve53]

Job 1:21 KJV

 

[fred_conty]

Sorry, but that is the type of justification for an atrocity is one should only expect from a bully: you made my God do it…you started it…so my God killed your children. Ta Da!

It is a bad story that leads to bad moral conclusions.

It sounds as though there are no consequences following from choices.

It also sounds as though Pharoh should be allowed to do what ever he pleases even tho it may be against God’s will and against human rights.

The atrocity was not an atrocity until Pharoh made it one, he was given the option of avoiding this. He was forewarned many times.

Bad moral conclusions? I don’t understand what you mean.

Just a thought or two.

And here are a couple of sites that may offer more insight and understanding.
keeleychorn.com/bible-study/1-samuel/1-samuel-15-king-sauls-disobedience/
jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2007/02/hard_sayings_of.html

 

[MarkV]

…forgot i already replied.

 

[Cormacnl]

Baptist theologian John Piper has a very straight forward view. I don’t agree but in case anyone is interested:

'It’s right for God to slaughter women and children anytime he pleases. God gives life and he takes life. Everybody who dies, dies because God wills that they die.

God is taking life every day. He will take 50,000 lives today. Life is in God’s hand. God decides when your last heartbeat will be, and whether it ends through cancer or a bullet wound. God governs.’
christianpost.com/news/what-made-it-ok-for-god-to-kill-women-children-in-old-testament-68737/