Questions about the Book of Exodus (O.T.)

Factual Questions
1

Due to the thread on and rewatching the movie of The Ten Commandments I’ve reread Exodus this week and have some questions. This may be more of a GD question but I’m not trying to antagonize or be ornery but genuinely asking for what the explanations are on some questions, some of which have literally bothered me about this book for more than 30 years now since I read it as a kid in elementary school and the teacher seemed to ignore anything that wasn’t in DeMille’s take as unimportant.

There are more questions, but here are the big ones. Any information sincerely appreciated.

In the second chapter Moses’s father-in-law is named Reuel but in the first verse of the next chapter his name is Jethro. The names of his father-in-law alternate thereafter even though it is always the same man (the one whose daughter he married upon fleeing Egypt). Was one of these perhaps a clan name? (Exodus says they were Midianites which presumably would have made them descendants of Abraham’s son Midian, but there is a Reuel mentioned in Genesis as a son of Esau.)

When God mentions Moses’s brother Aaron at the burning bush it is implied that Moses knew who Aaron was and it is said that Aaron had also received a vision sending him to meet Moses. Moses also gives his sons Hebrew names while in exile. Is there apocryphal lore that explains how Moses knew about his Hebrew heritage? It states in Exodus that his birth mother was his wet-nurse but he’s clearly referred to as an Egyptian.

Horeb is referred to as the mountain of God and a sacred place to Him. God works the miracle of water from a stone there and it is from there that the Hebrews depart. Is there any tradition that explains why Horeb was sacred to God? It sounds almost as if it is his home or the source of his power. For how long has the mountain known as Sinai/Horeb today (a barren and seemingly lifeless place) been identified as the mountain from Exodus? Was God in exile? Did he still continue to occupy the mountain?

God sends Moses to Pharaoh but then almost immediately decides to kill him instead. Is this explained in other texts? Supposedly Zipporah’s circumcision of Gershon appeases Him, but was this a loyalty test or…?

Sometimes during the Plagues it is said that Pharaoh hardened his heart, but other times it specifically God hardened Pharaoh’s heart. Is this explained?

God asks for an offering of the hides of dugongs. Were these commonly used in religious ritual at the time? Are other sea mammals used as offerings? How did they catch and kill them?

Of course the strangest question is probably the least answerable. The children of Israel, slaves for more than 4 centuries, are led out of Egypt by a God that they personally witness sending horrendous plague after horrendous plague against their masters (thus proving that His power is enormous and He has a terrible temper). He encourages them to loot Egypt while exiting, He sends shafts of fire and clouds to guide them, and he OPENS A SEA (or large body of water) for them and then DROWNS THE MIGHTIEST CAVALRY ON EARTH for them, and when they come to his holy mountain, the place that is obviously extremely sacred to Him, they evidently forget all of this (you’re only as good as your last miracle in the Bible) and are worshipping another god within 40 days! Is this very odd occurence explained (were the people under the sway of a demon or another god or whatever)?

2

I h ave no help on this, but did want to say I asked this very same question in Sunday School a few years ago. (I might, perhaps, not said it as diplomatically as you did…I think my words were along the lines of “Why were they such buttheads?”)

Dead silence ensued…

3

Reuel vs Jethro: Reuel appears in the passages apparently authored in the J tradition while Jethro appears in E passages. (For explanations of J and E, check out the JEPD theories in the Staff reports Who wrote the Bible? (Part 1).) (Similar changes in “voice” seem to be behind the alternative names Horeb and Sinai.)

While the Midianites identify (the newly arrived) Moses as an Egyptian, they are probably basing the impression on his clothing and speech. The tradition that Moses recognized his kinship with the Hebrews at the time that he slew the Egyptian overseer, while not explicit in the text, has been the generally accepted explanation. Similarly, it is generally accepted that before he fled Egypt, Moses probably learned somewhat of his family. Again, it is not in the text.

The identification of Horeb as a place of God is confusing, but it may contain elements of foreshadowing. (God is going to do this wonderful thing for the Hebrews at this place, so we recognize that it must have been a sacred place and we will call it sacred even before anything wonderful happens in the story.)

Several of the confusing elements of the story are often perceived as the result of similar but not identical stories being reconciled by the author(s)/redactor(s) that combined the J and E traditions, (then spun in the P and D viewpoints).

Regarding the circumcision of Gershom, the Jewish Study Bible says:

So it appears that you can accept your confusion in good company.

The source of Pharoah’s hardened heart, (whether God or Pharoah), has been discussed for years. The most frequent explanation given has been that God was simply bringing forth the actual malice that already lay in the heart of Pharoah. Another aspect of the story is that the authors attribute all actions to God, so even this phenomenon is the doing of God.

In the Jewish Study Bible, the explanation is that when God speaks of hardening Pharoah’s heart, He is not speaking of every change by Pharoah, but is predicting the final confrontation. Their claim (which seems a little weak to me) is that Pharoah is the one who actually hardens his own heart through the first nine plagues (regardless of the text?) and that God then punishes Pharoah by freezing his hardened heart into the rigid hatred that Pharoah has employed, himself.

(No clue about dugongs.)

4

Separate post for the big question: The entire history of the Israelites throughout the Torah/Law and the Former Prophets/Historical books is a series of God doing wonderful things for the people who then turn their backs on God. It is the single most frequent type of event. God raises Judges to defend the Israelites from the Canaanites and as soon as one enemy is dispatched, the Israelites go back to sinning. Eventually, the Israelites decide that they don’t like waiting for God’s judges and ask for a king. God reluctantly gives them Saul as king, who immediately falls into sin. God raises up David who is beloved of God, and David can’t seem to wait to get into trouble. God raises Solomon because Solomon seeks wisdom from God and displays righteousness, yet he has not had the throne very long before he is importing wives and their foreign gods by the caravan full. In the days of the later prophets, Isaiah (among others) promises that God will protect as long as the people believe in Him and the people actually do (for a bit) leading God to destroy the Assyrians outside the gates of Jerusalem–and the people immediately go back to their old sins.

The motif is more important than the motive. Looking for clear logic is not going to provide a satisfactory answer.
(In terms of the proximate motive displayed, if you read through the passage you see the Hebrews complaining almost from the moment that they get across the sea. They were constantly in fear that they had been led away from hearth and home and the protection of civilization (even if purchased with harsh treatment) to wander–and starve–in the wilderness.

5

You have to remember…there’s one common theme about the generation that left Egypt…they’re pretty much stupid and whiny. They bitch about being hungry, they bitch about being thirsty, they bitch that conquering Canaan will be too hard. They’re just a bunch of whiners.

6

Well, the only times that God hardens Pharoah’s heart in the text is after the the plague of boils, the plague of locust, the plague of darkness, and before the plague of the first born.

One explanation, that maybe won’t cut much slack nowadays is that, when Exodus starts, Pharoah makes the Hebrews slaves, and more importantly, orders that every Hebrew boy be killed at birth. So, that action needs to be punished, and the only fair punishment is the death of the Egyptian first born sons. Since Egypt killed all the Hebrew boys, they have to lose their boys. So, the heart hardening is to make sure the punishments get to that stage.

7

Yeah, you’ve got to realize that the people who wrote these passages about their Israelite ancestors turning away from God weren’t really talking about their Israelite ancestors. They were talking about their contemporaries. As in, “You idiots better shape up, or YHWH’s gonna make with the smiting and the BRIMstone and the HEY LADY!”

Or, “Hmmm. Nice flock of cattle you got here. Be a shame if anything were to happen to it. Remember when the Israelites got smote when they worshipped that golden calf? If it were just me, I’d let it slide, y’know? But business is business, and if the Big Guy don’t get his cut by Saturday there’s nuttin I can do.”

8

slight hijack but something similar happens in the new testament in Matthew chapters 14-15 . First Jesus feeds the five thousand with the loaves and fish, and then a bit later on confronts another large crowd this time of four thousand. " How can we feed them?" cry the Disciples again as if they hadnt seen the previous miracle only a little while before. The answer in this case is probably that one story became two when the gospel was put together

9

Not really a hijack but an excellent response to SOME of your questions is found in Rabbi Teliushkin’s book Biblical Literacy : The Most Important People, Events, and Ideas of the Hebrew Bible. It’s very readable for anyone, and I highly recommend it.

For example: Moses was breastfed by his mother, who obviously would have taught him about his people. A child can be fed until he’s about 4 if the mother really wants to prolong it.

10

There was a piece on NPR the other day (well, around Passover) discussing this very thing. I’m sorry to say that I didn’t stay in the car long enough to hear all of it or even learn which expert was being interviewed, but she observed that the translation of “hardened” in this context can mean that the problems of the world weighed heavily on him. So “hardened” can mean “weighed down.” I thought that was interesting.

I don’t know about this one – I ain’t no Bible scholar – but since the number 40 represents generational change, I would postulate that this means the people haven’t seen a whole lot of action out of God for a long time, long enough to lose the sense of God’s presence and immediacy. Hence the golden calf. I’ve read before that beliefs at the time were that the power of gods was tied to their location; therefore, a god who had power in one land did not have the same power elsewhere. I’d thought this worship of the golden calf was an extension of that. They’ve come a long way, they’re in a new place, maybe they need to worship a local guy to reap benefits.

11

This makes sense to me. Why shouldnt it cut slack nowadays?

12

A lot of people these days have problems with the idea of “collective punishment” and killing of the innocent for retribution. In other words, if you kill my kid, it’s not generally considered appropriate anymore for me to kill your kid.

13

Remember, the generation who left Egypt (except maybe Joshua) did not enter the Holy Land. The 40 years in the desert was to allow a generation who did not know slavery to grow up.

Now I’ve got a question: Does anyone know how much of what was written in the Bible came from oral tradition, and how much was made up? The origin of the Flood story is clear, at least. Were the different versions of stories there so that different audiences would find the story they grew up with, and knew to be true, in the text? IIRC Who Wrote the Bible says that some of the stories came from Israel, and some from Judah. What I’m asking is how much is creative work, and how much is selection and editing from a pre-existing body of legends?

40 years in a desert is a perfect example - was this in the tradition, or made up as a message to the population of Judah?

14

I had always heard that the Golden Calf was meant as a representation of Yahweh Himself. But even though it wasn’t a “strange god”, an idol even of the One True God was still idolatry. So it’s not that the Hebrews were disrespecting God; it’s that they were respecting him in the wrong manner.

15

Yes, I agree with that obviously. But that doesn’t mean that this is not the explanation. I think this fits well with the god character.

If you want to explain the OT god’s actions, so they are acceptable to modern moral values, you have your work cut out for you. :slight_smile:

16

Joshua and Caleb. In Numbers 13 and 14, the Israelites get to the border of Canaan, and Moses sends out 12 scouts, one from each tribe, to explore the land. When they report back, they say that Canaan is really nice, but the people there are really strong and numerous, and we’ll get our asses kicked if we try to settle there. Only two of the scouts, named Joshua and Caleb, say that the Israelites should go ahead and take it over. Then the other ten scouts go through the Israelite camp and incite the people, who riot and say they won’t go any further.

So, at that point, God asks Moses the same question that the OP asked:

Moses manages to calm God down, appealing both to His reputation “But the Egyptians will find out and they’ll laugh at you and call you a wimp”, and His sense of mercy, and God backs down. But, God says, no Israelite over 20, except for Joshua and Caleb, will ever live in Canaan, and everyone will have to wander in the desert for 40 more years.

17

The OP raises several good questions. All I can add to the discussion is, there is an old tradition about why we have two hands: One to read the text of the Torah, and the other to follow the commentaries of Rashi.

Also, a techincal point: In Exd. 14, it’s not Egyptian cavalry that are wiped out, it’s Egyptian charioteers. The Hyksos conquered Egypt with chariots; when they were kicked out, by the time of Ramses II, the chariots remained. I’m not sure at what point the Tanakh clearly discusses horseback riding as opposed to chariot driving.

18

Interestingly, while most of the other translations I looked at said things like sea cow, porpoise, dolphin, etc, the King James says “badger”. Badger actually makes more sense, since Israel really wasn’t known as a seafaring people. So when Sampiro asks, “How did they catch and kill them”, that’s a really good question. Especially since the Israelites were in the wilderness at the time. Perhaps they were expected to buy their dugong/porpose/dolphin skins from a passing bedouin caravan :wink: