Response to Exodus and Robinson

In the beginning of Exodus, Pharaoh commands the Israelite midwives to kill the Israelite’s newborn male offspring. The midwives do not do this, and when questioned say that “Hebrew women. . . give birth before the midwives arrive” (Exodus 1). The text goes on to say that God blesses the midwives. This raises a serious question: is deception ever acceptable? Later in the text, God gives the law, “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor” (Exodus 20:16). Clearly, God considers lying wrong. However, the midwives lied to Pharaoh and were blessed by God. Was lying justified in this instance because it was the alternative to killing Israelite children?  This is incident is reminiscent of a similar situation in 1940’s Germany. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German theologian that opposed the Nazi regime and the treatment of Jews by Hitler. Bonhoeffer decided to enter into a plot against Hitler, and in doing so was forced into deception. He had arrived at a place in his walk with Christ where he rejected what he considered basic legalism. He instead had “a respect for the truth that was so deep, it forced him beyond the easy legalism of truth telling” (Metaxas 365.) To Bonhoeffer, the spirit of the truth was not simply avoiding a lie, but rather walking so closely with God that “one did not live legalistically by ‘rules’ or ‘principles’” (Metaxas 367.) This is a difficult for me to fully understand. Honestly, (pun intended) I am not sure how I feel about broadening or modifying my view of truth. On the surface, it can be seen as a rejection of God’s law. However, I do see the alternative issue of allowing atrocities because of an unwavering devotion to textbook truth-telling.

            Later in the story of the Israelite’s struggles with Egypt, God uses plagues to convince the Egyptians to release the Israelites. A question comes to mind here: why plagues? It would have been much simpler and easier for God to wipe out the Egyptians, effectively freeing the Israelites. It could even be justified; the Egyptians enslaved God’s chosen people. Furthermore, why does God allow the Israelites to live under the yoke of the Egyptians for hundreds of years and then suddenly decide to send Moses to free the Egyptians? In Robinson’s essay on Moses, she offers an explanation for the latter question. She explains that the Israelites were able to take possession of the land only after the Canaanites ceased to be worthy of it. God did not decide to randomly kick the Canaanites out, rather it is implied that the Canaanites somehow became wicked and undeserving of their land. After this occurs, God begins the process of transporting the Israelites into the promised land. We now come back to the former question: why did God subject the Egyptians and Israelites to plagues? God himself declares that, “. . . I have raised you up for this very purpose, that I might show you my power and that my name might be proclaimed throughout the earth” (Exodus 9:16.) This can be interpreted many ways based on one’s overall view of God. I am of the opinion that God is ultimately good, and so shall interpret the passage through that light. By making his power known, God was showing mercy to the Egyptians. He could have wiped them out, yet he chose not to. Instead, God plagued the Egyptians that they might see his power. Note that the majority of the plagues merely caused discomfort. Except for the final plague, the Passover, God was not gallivanting around Egypt killing Egyptians. Although the final plague did kill the first born, God also provided a way to avoid this. The text does not expressly say that the Egyptians could participate in the ritual, but it appears to be probable. God, throughout Exodus, displays mercy by giving opportunities for the Egyptians to see his power and decide to ingratiate themselves with the Hebrew’s God.

In the Robinson reading, it is explained that the Old Testament and its God are often given a bad reputation by critics that pick and choose the aspects of the Old Testament they look at and willfully misinterpret. According to Robinson, many scholars completely ignore the laws that have a chance at representing God as something other than an angry, archaic deity. Robinson notes that the New Testament and Jesus are often left untouched by scholars. The Old Testament takes the brunt of the abuse. She notes in her final paragraphs that many of Jesus’ maxims are echoes of Mosaic law. Robinson’s point is displayed wonderfully in Exodus when God demands care for the poor and does not allow mistreatment of aliens. The law given to the people after leaving Egypt is further evidence that God is merciful and loving. A cruel God would not tell people to take care of the poor, be kind to strangers, and party. Obviously, God did not suddenly become loving when Christ came into the world, God has been loving and merciful since the book of Exodus, at least.