What's WRONG with this Ten Plague description?

by Terry 49 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  PrimateDave

  Leolaia makes a good point about the tendency of Biblical story writers to exaggerate. Nevertheless, the story of the Plagues and Exodus makes one wonder at the morality of a deity that would cause innocent humans and animals to suffer because of the stubbornness of one man, Pharaoh (who must not be named). The fact that the Pharaoh is not named is often cited as evidence of a much later writing date for these stories. In other words, Moses would not have been the author.

  Further exaggerations are seen in the claimed population growth of the Hebrews, descendants of Abraham (from Ur of the Chaldeans), who entered the land with a total population of 70 persons. After only four generations over a span of 215 (or 350 or 430) years, they left with a population of 600,000 men over 20 years of age, "all that were able to go forth to war in Israel," in addition to 22,000 Levite males, women, children, and the elderly. Can someone do the math? In other words, this is impossible if one accepts the "divinely inspired" word at face value. If the writer didn't mean what he said, then how can anything in the narrative be trusted? Apologists who attempt to explain away these inconsistencies are guilty of wishful thinking and truthiness.

  How ironic, then, that the writer of Deuteronomy should say: "7:7 The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people."

  lol!
• 

  glenster

  This would work:

  Hebrew University professor Abraham Malamat has proposed that the Bible often
  refers to 600 and its multiples, as well as 1,000 and its multiples, typologi-
  cally in order to convey the idea of a large military unit.

  "The issue of Exodus 12:37 is an interpretive one. The Hebrew word eleph can
  be translated 'thousand,' but it is also rendered in the Bible as 'clans' and
  'military units.' There are thought to have been 20,000 men in the entire Egyp-
  tian army at the height of Egypt's empire. And at the battle of Ai in Joshua 7,
  there was a severe military setback when 36 troops were killed."[citation
  needed]

  Therefore if one reads alaphim (plural of eleph) as military units, the number
  of Hebrew fighting men lay between 5,000 and 6,000. In theory, this would give a
  total Hebrew population of less than 20,000, something within the range of his-
  torical possibility.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus#Logistics
• 

  PrimateDave

  "We're not talking about truth, we're talking about something that seems like truth – the truth we want to exist" - Stephen Colbert on the origin of the word "truthiness."

  Do apologists actually read the Bible? If no one called the Bible writers out on their Biblical nonsense, would apologists bother with alternative explanations for what the writers were supposed to have meant? Really, this is practically the whole basis for the Watchtower Corporation religion and book club: thinking up plausible sounding explanations for ridiculous Biblical myths. To accept the evidence and actually deny a divine origin for the Bible would be suicide.
• 

  Terry

  To accept the evidence and actually deny a divine origin for the Bible would be suicide.

  Christianity (except for Catholics) are vested clear through with the "Word" and they can't distance themeselves very far from it.

  This leads to pious fraud in exchange for the power to control people behind the guise of channeling bible truth.
• 

  diamondiiz

  wts translation

  6)Accordingly Jehovah did this thing on the next day, and all sorts of livestock* of Egypt began to die; but not one of the livestock of the sons of Israel died. 7 Then Phar′aoh sent, and, look! not so much as one of Israel’s livestock had died. Nevertheless, Phar′aoh’s heart continued to be unresponsive, and he did not send the people away.

  *Or, "And all the livestock"

  Interestingly from the regular reading of wts bible(standard copy) one would assume that all sorts of animals began to die but not necessarily that all have died. Which one could reason that v21 is speaking of the remaining livestock which were not killed by the 5th plague. Yet, all other translations that I looked at simply state that "all the livestock died" hmm interesting
• 

  glenster

  
  "Do apologists actually read the Bible? If no one called the Bible writers out
  on their Biblical nonsense, would apologists bother with alternative explana-
  tions for what the writers were supposed to have meant?"

  I read the verses brought up regarding what was asked about them--if they
  contradict, not the choice of whether or not to believe in God or all imaginable
  interpretations of verses, which may include imagining that they contradict. I
  approached it like a riddle in a secular logic puzzle book. If two ideas are
  reconcilable, they can't properly be called irreconcilably contradictory.

  The answers I gave are credible possibilities for what the authors meant and
  reconcile the ideas--I mean nothing more than that. The point that they're
  irreconcilable therefore might be the point that's forced for a belief or non-
  belief agenda that goes beyond that.

  If all the Egyptian livestock dies in the first of two examples of it, is it
  logical to assume that no matter how much time goes by before the second example
  they wouldn't replenish their livestock? Why? I can't think of a good reason
  for that. I would think they would.
• 

  moshe

  Terry, Terry, you have missed the point- it didn't say that the livestock in the field were "alive", did it? The previous plague had already killed the livestock and they were still in the field, where they had dropped dead. I couldn't figure that out and then I put on my JW negative logic thinking cap. Problem solved.

  added- or the Egyptians had gone out and purchased new livestock to replace the ones that had been killed. Maybe the Jews sold them their livestock for a good price.
• 

  Robdar

  I've enjoyed reading this thread. It reminds me of the "Torah and More" discussions we have at one of the local synagogues. Every week we discuss scripture and attempt to understand it (which is futile, btw). The nice thing about our discussions is that everybody's thoughts and opinions about scripture are welcome and considered to be valid.
• 

  Terry

  Terry, Terry, you have missed the point- it didn't say that the livestock in the field were "alive", did it? The previous plague had already killed the livestock and they were still in the field, where they had dropped dead. I couldn't figure that out and then I put on my JW negative logic thinking cap. Problem solved.

  added- or the Egyptians had gone out and purchased new livestock to replace the ones that had been killed. Maybe the Jews sold them their livestock for a good price.

  Yes, or the magic-practising priests of Egypt (who could duplicate most of Moses' "miracles") raised the livestock from the dead!!
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Excellent point about use of hyperbole, Leolaia. I am reminded of Tolkien's writings of the elder days and his descriptions therein. Whenever someone lost a loved one they experienced "the greatest grief evern known in the world" or some such; all of them did. Taken literally and logically there would have been a 10-way tie for the "greatest grief" just among the Silmarillion accounts. The Bible isn't all that much different from any other mythological work. It's full of hyperbole and allegory.