The Ten Plagues of Egypt- allegorical or historical?

metis · Mar 30, 2020

InChrist said:
The account appears to indicate Pharaoh’s heart was already hard and cruel. God simply expedited Pharaoh’s character and heart condition.
Maybe these linked articles will give you some food for thought on this topic, if you’re interested...

“According to Adam Clarke's commentary, the Hebrew word translated harden "literally signifies to strengthen, confirm, make bold or courageous." An illustration commonly heard is that of a sponge squeezed (made hard) in the hand. Anything that comes forth from the squeezed sponge was already there. When God "hardened" Pharaoh's heart, He simply forced out what was already there, strengthening Pharaoh's own convictions.”

Question: Did God take away Pharaoh's free will when He "hardened Pharaoh's heart" (Exodus 10:1-2)? What verses point to free will in the Bible?

In Defense of the Faith

There are more variant Jewish commentaries on this than any other single verse in Torah because, on the surface, it flies in the face of basic decency that God would supposedly do such a thing. Thus, what is wrong with it is highly conjectural and not agreed upon by scholars.

Since I never have believed in scriptural inerrancy, it really doesn't surprise nor particularly bother me as it simply doesn't make one iota of sense. But to the literalist, they have a problem because it simply doesn't stand up to even the most basic standard of human compassion that Jesus and God taught elsewhere in scripture.

Evangelicalhumanist · Mar 31, 2020

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
Well...yes..that is what you said. There are no real Jews or Israelites. Just Canaanites.

Good-Ole-Rebel

No, that is NOT what I said. Here is what I said, and it is a direct quote (you can scroll back and see for yourself): "their forebears were Canaanites and pagan."

My forbears were English, but I am no less Canadian for that.

Please stop inventing things to put into my mouth.

Good-Ole-Rebel · Mar 31, 2020

Evangelicalhumanist said:
No, that is NOT what I said. Here is what I said, and it is a direct quote (you can scroll back and see for yourself): "their forebears were Canaanites and pagan."

My forbears were English, but I am no less Canadian for that.

Please stop inventing things to put into my mouth.

Well, just what are you addressing? Israel's physical ancestory or their religious ancestory? I was under the impression you were emphasizing their religious ancestory. See your post #(67).

Israel physically is not Canaanite. Concerning their physical ancestory Abraham was Syrian and from Ur of the Chaldees. (Deut. 26:5) (Gen. 11:31)

Religious wise, Israel is not Canaanite either. Their 'forbears' were not Canannite. Their forbears were the people of God of the lineage of Adam, then Seth, all the way through Noah. That is where Israel's ancestory of religion comes from. (Gen. 4:26) (Gen. 5:1-32) (Gen. 7) (Gen. 9:1) (Gen. 11:10-30)

Good-Ole-Rebel

9-10ths_Penguin · Mar 31, 2020

9-10ths_Penguin said:
Would they even work as an allegory? If they were an allegory, what message do you think they're trying to express?

@adrian009 - I think my question got lost here, so let's try it again.

Let's take it as given that the Exodus story was meant as an allegory; what is this allegory trying to communicate to the story's audience?

If it's an allegory, then it was meant to communicate something.

metis · Mar 31, 2020

The archaeology seemingly indicates that the Israelites were and are Canaanites as no evidence of major conflict shows up. Some feel there was friction between the highlanders and the more coastal Jews, thus the possible source of the alleged conflict of those coming back from Egypt.

All societies have folktales that eventually get assumed as being real history.

Thief · Mar 31, 2020

adrian009 said:
Excuse my perverse sense of humour but with the coronavirus on the forefront of our minds, I thought a debate about the ten plagues of Egypt might provide a welcome distraction for some of us more scripturally orientated members. I’ve been thinking about plagues after a family member asked me if the coronavirus could be considered a plague. I explained that it couldn’t and the term isn’t used in medicine these days except when discussing the history of medicine long before the advent of the science of microbiology.

It had me thinking about the ten plagues of Egypt. Most of us are familiar with the story but for those who aren’t it forms part of the story of the book of Exodus when Ten disasters are inflicted on Egypt by Yahweh the God of Israel, in order to force the Pharaoh to allow the Israelites to depart from slavery; they serve as "signs and marvels" given by God to answer Pharaoh's taunt that he does not know Yahweh: "The Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD."

The last plague is perhaps the most evocative. In Exodus 11:4-6 it is written;

This is what the LORD says: "About midnight I will go throughout Egypt. Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn of the slave girl, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well. There will be loud wailing throughout Egypt—worse than there has ever been or ever will be again."

Before His final plague, God commands Moses to tell the Israelites to mark a lamb’s blood above their doors in order that Yahweh will pass over them (i.e., that they will not be touched by the death of the firstborn). Pharaoh distraught at the carnage orders the Israelites to leave, taking whatever they want.

Adapted from
Plagues of Egypt - Wikipedia

So were the ten plagues of Egypt allegorical or historical? What proofs if any can you use to support your position?

I've seen soooooo many science documentaries
making attempt to rationalize the scenario
and they weren't bad

but as I was watching the CB Demille's Ten Commandments
there was dialogue in the Pharaoh's court that ran parallel to science

hmmmmmm

Evangelicalhumanist · Mar 31, 2020

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
Well, just what are you addressing? Israel's physical ancestory or their religious ancestory? I was under the impression you were emphasizing their religious ancestory. See your post #(67).

Israel physically is not Canaanite. Concerning their physical ancestory Abraham was Syrian and from Ur of the Chaldees. (Deut. 26:5) (Gen. 11:31)

Religious wise, Israel is not Canaanite either. Their 'forbears' were not Canannite. Their forbears were the people of God of the lineage of Adam, then Seth, all the way through Noah. That is where Israel's ancestory of religion comes from. (Gen. 4:26) (Gen. 5:1-32) (Gen. 7) (Gen. 9:1) (Gen. 11:10-30)

Good-Ole-Rebel

Yes, I can see that you read the Bible -- but I can also see that you completely ignore history and archaeology. You see, Abraham, Adam, Seth and Noah are all mythical -- they did not actually exist. They were invented characters in the invention of a "history" of the Israelites. And that invented history is what the Bible records. Sadly, it isn't what actually happened.

You might try reading some work by actual scholars, and in particular actual scholars working in Israel, who are Jews, and who know that the story in the OT is primarily myth. For example: Finkelstein, Israel, and Neil Asher Silberman. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Sacred Texts. Simon and Schuster, 2002.

One of the more interesting things you might find is the Hebrew is in fact a Canaanite language -- and in fact is the only living Canaanite language today.

Meantime, there's a good synopsis on Wikipedia which you could have a look at (though I'm fairly sure you will not bother). Israelites - Wikipedia

Kelly of the Phoenix · Mar 31, 2020

adrian009 said:
So were the ten plagues of Egypt allegorical or historical? What proofs if any can you use to support your position?

Both, but we can never know for sure.

Good-Ole-Rebel · Mar 31, 2020

Evangelicalhumanist said:
Yes, I can see that you read the Bible -- but I can also see that you completely ignore history and archaeology. You see, Abraham, Adam, Seth and Noah are all mythical -- they did not actually exist. They were invented characters in the invention of a "history" of the Israelites. And that invented history is what the Bible records. Sadly, it isn't what actually happened.

You might try reading some work by actual scholars, and in particular actual scholars working in Israel, who are Jews, and who know that the story in the OT is primarily myth. For example: Finkelstein, Israel, and Neil Asher Silberman. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Sacred Texts. Simon and Schuster, 2002.

One of the more interesting things you might find is the Hebrew is in fact a Canaanite language -- and in fact is the only living Canaanite language today.

Meantime, there's a good synopsis on Wikipedia which you could have a look at (though I'm fairly sure you will not bother). Israelites - Wikipedia

Well, the Bible says they did exist. You say they didn't. Guess Who I believe....it ain't you.

I cannot express the disappointment I had years ago when I was in a volatile debate about the Bible and especially the Old Testament. I wanted to be able to prove my point and so called a Synagogue to use as a reference. And they pretty much said what you are saying. They didn't believe their own Old Testament. Now, in our day, you have 'Christians' or people who call themselves 'Christians', just like them. They do not believe either that the Bible is the written Word of God. Oh it's good stories that men wrote..yada, yada, yada, b.s. Disappointing to me.

If you advise me to read an article found on 'Wikipedia', you are correct, I will not bother.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Evangelicalhumanist · Mar 31, 2020

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
If you advise me to read an article found on 'Wikipedia', you are correct, I will not bother.

Good-Ole-Rebel

And for the very simplest and most obvious of reasons: knowledge is not what you are interested in.

And because knowledge IS what I'm interested in, we will pretty much never have anything of interest to say to one another.

Good-Ole-Rebel · Mar 31, 2020

Evangelicalhumanist said:
And for the very simplest and most obvious of reasons: knowledge is not what you are interested in.

And because knowledge IS what I'm interested in, we will pretty much never have anything of interest to say to one another.

Oh I am interested in knowledge. The knowledge of God.

Yes, you are correct. Our interests are not the same.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Dawnofhope · Mar 31, 2020

9-10ths_Penguin said:
@adrian009 - I think my question got lost here, so let's try it again.

Let's take it as given that the Exodus story was meant as an allegory; what is this allegory trying to communicate to the story's audience?

If it's an allegory, then it was meant to communicate something.

I would hope we could agree the Exodus story is meaningful to many people as opposed to meaningless. Some will see more meanings, others will see none whatsoever. The story emphasises central themes and motifs that are present throughout the Hebrew Bible and beyond that the New Testament and Quran. They include the idea that Yahweh is the God of all, He protects whom He pleases, blesses and rewards them, and punishes those who are oppressive and tyrannous. He allows free will but eventually we will all be judged, rewarded or punished in accordance to whether we turns towards Him or away. I believe that is a core message throughout Abrahamic scriptures and is illustrated richly throughout the ten plagues story.

Beyond the obvious message of the story there is rich symbolism that recurs throughout Hebrew Scriptures.

The Ten Plagues | My Jewish Learning

nPeace · Mar 31, 2020

metis said:
The archaeology seemingly indicates that the Israelites were and are Canaanites as no evidence of major conflict shows up. Some feel there was friction between the highlanders and the more coastal Jews, thus the possible source of the alleged conflict of those coming back from Egypt.

All societies have folktales that eventually get assumed as being real history.

I find that interesting.
"The archaeology seemingly indicates..."
So are you saying, you re more willing to rely on men in our modern times, some 3000 years after the history, piecing together bits and pieces of clay, and rock, to come up with their own idea of what was, rather than a recorded written history, that was the custom of the people (to write down, and keep records of their past activities, and lineage)?
I must say honestly, I find that to be quite a marvel.

nPeace · Mar 31, 2020

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
Well, the Bible says they did exist. You say they didn't. Guess Who I believe....it ain't you.

I cannot express the disappointment I had years ago when I was in a volatile debate about the Bible and especially the Old Testament. I wanted to be able to prove my point and so called a Synagogue to use as a reference. And they pretty much said what you are saying. They didn't believe their own Old Testament. Now, in our day, you have 'Christians' or people who call themselves 'Christians', just like them. They do not believe either that the Bible is the written Word of God. Oh it's good stories that men wrote..yada, yada, yada, b.s. Disappointing to me.

If you advise me to read an article found on 'Wikipedia', you are correct, I will not bother.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Shake my hand brother. I feel the same way you do.
I am sure if we gave them scholarly views contrary to theirs, they would dismiss them, preferring the views that suits them.
It boils my insides just hearing people professing to believe the Bible, yet tear it to shreds by their words.
I get the sense of how Jesus and his followers felt. (Matthew 15:6-9) ; Acts 7:53) Do you hear the sting in Jesus' and Stephen's voice?

IndigoChild5559 · Mar 31, 2020

adrian009 said:
Excuse my perverse sense of humour but with the coronavirus on the forefront of our minds, I thought a debate about the ten plagues of Egypt might provide a welcome distraction for some of us more scripturally orientated members. I’ve been thinking about plagues after a family member asked me if the coronavirus could be considered a plague. I explained that it couldn’t and the term isn’t used in medicine these days except when discussing the history of medicine long before the advent of the science of microbiology.

It had me thinking about the ten plagues of Egypt. Most of us are familiar with the story but for those who aren’t it forms part of the story of the book of Exodus when Ten disasters are inflicted on Egypt by Yahweh the God of Israel, in order to force the Pharaoh to allow the Israelites to depart from slavery; they serve as "signs and marvels" given by God to answer Pharaoh's taunt that he does not know Yahweh: "The Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD."

The last plague is perhaps the most evocative. In Exodus 11:4-6 it is written;

This is what the LORD says: "About midnight I will go throughout Egypt. Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn of the slave girl, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well. There will be loud wailing throughout Egypt—worse than there has ever been or ever will be again."

Before His final plague, God commands Moses to tell the Israelites to mark a lamb’s blood above their doors in order that Yahweh will pass over them (i.e., that they will not be touched by the death of the firstborn). Pharaoh distraught at the carnage orders the Israelites to leave, taking whatever they want.

Adapted from
Plagues of Egypt - Wikipedia

So were the ten plagues of Egypt allegorical or historical? What proofs if any can you use to support your position?

Yes, I've thought about the fact that the coronavirus is a plague of Biblical proportions as well.

But also, in a week it will be Passover.

I'm really not sure what my position is, personally. I could go any number of different directions. God is certainly capable of all those things quite literally. It is also possible that the plagues were natural events that God used on behalf of Israel. And it is also true that the entire story could be legend, IOW being based on something true but having a fictitious narrative grow up around it.

It doesn't really matter to me, to be really honest. The story is there to tell me who I am as a Jew. This works whether it is historical or not.

So next week, I will be asking, "Why is this night different from all other nights?"

Good-Ole-Rebel · Apr 1, 2020

nPeace said:
Shake my hand brother. I feel the same way you do.
I am sure if we gave them scholarly views contrary to theirs, they would dismiss them, preferring the views that suits them.
It boils my insides just hearing people professing to believe the Bible, yet tear it to shreds by their words.
I get the sense of how Jesus and his followers felt. (Matthew 15:6-9) ; Acts 7:53) Do you hear the sting in Jesus' and Stephen's voice?

Yes, I would shake your hand. And Jesus would have felt these things to a much larger degree due to Who He was. Amen brother.

Good-Ole-Rebel

metis · Apr 1, 2020

nPeace said:
I find that interesting.
"The archaeology seemingly indicates..."
So are you saying, you re more willing to rely on men in our modern times, some 3000 years after the history, piecing together bits and pieces of clay, and rock, to come up with their own idea of what was, rather than a recorded written history, that was the custom of the people (to write down, and keep records of their past activities, and lineage)?
I must say honestly, I find that to be quite a marvel.

I believe foremost in study and objectivity since I am a scientist, thus I do not blindly accept anything that does not have some supporting evidence beyond just hearsay. However, I sometimes "lean" in certain directions based on premonition (long story) and intuition, thus I do tend to accept certain items based on faith. But what I don't do is to call my faith-leanings "facts".

nPeace · Apr 1, 2020

metis said:
I believe foremost in study and objectivity since I am a scientist, thus I do not blindly accept anything that does not have some supporting evidence beyond just hearsay. However, I sometimes "lean" in certain directions based on premonition (long story) and intuition, thus I do tend to accept certain items based on faith. But what I don't do is to call my faith-leanings "facts".

Seems you are suggesting that religious people who accept the Bible as truth, are blindly believing on hearsay, with no supporting evidence.
Why do you believe this? Is it because some in your "faith", and others, of like mind, tell you this, or do you assume that to be the case?

If either, I can understand, your thinking, because I have had someone here who professes to be Christian, tell me that his faith is blind, so if you have the same view, I totally understand.
However, for your information, the Biblical faith is not blind, and is based on supporting evidence, and they are religious people who know this, contrary to you.
I find it quite interesting that although I have heard a number of religious persons on these forums, point out clearly how the Biblical faith is not blind, there are actually professed Christians who claim otherwise.... may I add, with no objective supporting evidence.

This - clearly Satanic - plan to tear down spiritual things (more on that, in the other thread), and promote secular or worldly thinking, is really the crux of the matter, and evidently some professed believers are riding that wagon, whether knowingly, or unknowingly.
However, that would not be surprising, when a person is part of the many waters, on which the harlot sits (Revelation 17:15). If persons love it there, and want to remain there, rather than heed the warning to get out (Revelation 18:4), then understandably their mind will be saturated with worldly thinking.

Why do you think that those who believe the Bible to be true, do not believe in study and objectivity?
More on objectivity, in the other thread.

metis · Apr 1, 2020

nPeace said:
Seems you are suggesting that religious people who accept the Bible as truth, are blindly believing on hearsay, with no supporting evidence.
Why do you believe this?

Because that's what it is. We can't interrogate the witnesses, nor can we be guaranteed that additions were made to change the narratives. This is not only a problem with verifying the scriptures but it also is a problem with history in general.

When we read hi,story-- any history-- we are reading people's take on events, which often includes subjectivity at times.

nPeace said:
This - clearly Satanic - plan to tear down spiritual things (more on that, in the other thread), and promote secular or worldly thinking, is really the crux of the matter, and evidently some professed believers are riding that wagon, whether knowingly, or unknowingly.

Now you are lying as I have no motive to "tear down spiritual things".

Common decency should have you asking versus drawing such a disingenuous assumption. I am a believer, so why is that so difficult for you to understand? Just because I don't turn the Bible into an idol doesn't mean nor imply that I ignore it or feel it has no value. I read it twice a day every day of the week and more on Sunday after services.

To put it bluntly, if making such accusations is characteristic of your supposed faith, then it is you who needs to repent and do as Jesus told you to do. Lying and/or jumping to conclusions is simply not the Christian thing to do.

nPeace · Apr 1, 2020

metis said:
Because that's what it is. We can't interrogate the witnesses, nor can we be guaranteed that additions were made to change the narratives. This is not only a problem with verifying the scriptures but it also is a problem with history in general.

When we read hi,story-- any history-- we are reading people's take on events, which often includes subjectivity at times.

So archaeologist and biological scientists interrogate the rocks and other things they find?

metis said:
Now you are lying as I have no motive to "tear down spiritual things".

Did I say you?
How do you read? Perhaps you should read it again.

metis said:
Common decency should have you asking versus drawing such a disingenuous assumption. I am a believer, so why is that so difficult for you to understand? Just because I don't turn the Bible into an idol doesn't mean nor imply that I ignore it or feel it has no value. I read it twice a day every day of the week and more on Sunday after services.

To put it bluntly, if making such accusations is characteristic of your supposed faith, then it is you who needs to repent and do as Jesus told you to do. Lying and/or jumping to conclusions is simply not the Christian thing to do.

Here we go again.
Seems to me you need to keep working harder on that tiger. It keeps jumping out for no apparent reason.
Or maybe there is a reason. I still remember the one you gave me, which I am not allowed to quote in another thread... unless, you give me permission.

The Ten Plagues of Egypt- allegorical or historical?

The Ten Plagues of Egypt- allegorical or historical?

Allegorical

Historical

Partly historical

We can’t possibly know for certain

This poll doesn’t reflect my thinking

aged ecumenical anthropologist

"Truth" isn't a thing...

Well-Known Member

1/10 Subway Stalinist

aged ecumenical anthropologist

Rogue Theologian

"Truth" isn't a thing...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

"Truth" isn't a thing...

Well-Known Member

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Well-Known Member

aged ecumenical anthropologist

Veteran Member

aged ecumenical anthropologist

Veteran Member