Asking Christians: How is killing all the first born sons of egypt moral?

[DebbieJ]

Let us not confuse morality with justice.

We cannot accuse a judge for being a murderer just because he sentenced to death 10,000 drug traffickers on a monthly basis by hanging. This includes kids. He is also an executioner for he will be the one to open the trap door. He is merely serving the law and it's penalty. Is this moral or immoral? Who defines it? You?

The law of the land defines what is moral and immoral. We cannot therefore define something as immoral by mere personal opinion or feelings. The law defines the parameter of what is immoral or not.

When president Truman approved the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing hundreds of thousands of innocent non-combatant Japanese people which includes women, children, babies, and expectant mothers, nobody accused him of being a murderer or being immoral. Why? Because he didn't break any law and it was justified whether or not it includes the innocent. If that was illegal, then, we can see him as bad as Hitler, a genocidal maniac.

For example, this is from a movie I've watched. If I killed someone by stabbing out of self-defense, I didn't break any law. But, deep down the mere sight of blood excites me and stabbing the person gives me pleasure, am I immoral? Am I a murderer? I didn't break any law. It was self-defense and the guy just happened to have chosen the wrong person to mess with. I'm not a serial killer and I'm a law abiding citizen. I don't have any criminal records.

If a country does not have any laws and just leave it to one's opinion about morality what is good and bad, we would be living in fear and anxiety as each person has an opinion about morality. A stranger can just barge in into someone's house and take someone's daughter because it is his moral duty to multiply the human race. lol

We need laws, we need penalties, and we need teeth to enforce it.

So, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth was the law of the Lord and it was enforced and the penalty served. There was justice. Pharaoh just happened to mess with the wrong people.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Let us not confuse morality with justice.

We cannot accuse a judge for being a murderer just because he sentenced to death 10,000 drug traffickers on a monthly basis by hanging. This includes kids. He is also an executioner for he will be the one to open the trap door. He is merely serving the law and it's penalty. Is this moral or immoral? Who defines it? You?

The law of the land defines what is moral and immoral. We cannot therefore define something as immoral by mere personal opinion or feelings. The law defines the parameter of what is immoral or not.

When president Truman approved the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing hundreds of thousands of innocent non-combatant Japanese people which includes women, children, babies, and expectant mothers, nobody accused him of being a murderer or being immoral. Why? Because he didn't break any law and it was justified whether or not it includes the innocent. If that was illegal, then, we can see him as bad as Hitler, a genocidal maniac.

For example, this is from a movie I've watched. If I killed someone by stabbing out of self-defense, I didn't break any law. But, deep down the mere sight of blood excites me and stabbing the person gives me pleasure, am I immoral? Am I a murderer? I didn't break any law. It was self-defense and the guy just happened to have chosen the wrong person to mess with. I'm not a serial killer and I'm a law abiding citizen. I don't have any criminal records.

If a country does not have any laws and just leave it to one's opinion about morality what is good and bad, we would be living in fear and anxiety as each person has an opinion about morality. A stranger can just barge in into someone's house and take someone's daughter because it is his moral duty to multiply the human race. lol

We need laws, we need penalties, and we need teeth to enforce it.

So, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth was the law of the Lord and it was enforced and the penalty served. There was justice. Pharaoh just happened to mess with the wrong people.

Justified to kill? I don’t see the judge being the executioner. The church is also justified to judge but not to kill. They will judge the angels thru whom Mose’s teachings came. That is actually the topic of THIS conversation.
(The 12 apostles will judge what came later, the 12 tribes of Israel. They are the result of the God ordained recipients of captivity, that God chose to lead out for the purpose of praise. God dwells therein.)
But within the context of THIS conversation only the judging of God is taking place. That being universal in context because the solution (if you had read my post that was not acknowledged) was about redeeming what was redeemable from the Cain-line.

The Cain-line, like the pigs that that spirit entered, kill instinctively. They don’t need an eye or tooth mentality to deem themselves justified.

 

[DebbieJ]

@Cassia I don't get your post. Sorry.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

@Cassia I don't get your post. Sorry.

Probably because you are not seeing the true judge. Oh well.

 

[durangodawood]

....The law of the land defines what is moral and immoral. We cannot therefore define something as immoral by mere personal opinion or feelings. The law defines the parameter of what is immoral or not....

Its pretty disturbing that we can make some abominable action morally correct (or vice versa) by just changing the law.

One day interracial marriage is immoral, the next day its morally correct?

Not buying it. Law needs to follow morality, not define it.

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

According to my understanding, God punished them for enslaving jews, and this is one of the punishment. Why did God punishing innocent kids instead of adults who did the enslaving?

Some of the common responses are 1."Morality does not apply to God" If that's the case, how do to condemn jihad in Islam? They are not bound by morality because they believe God tell them to do it. 2."God is not supposed to be a role model" But Jesus is role model, And Jesus is God. 3."Grand plans, killing to the kids are necessary to achieve it" God is omnipotent. Hard to believe avoiding killing innocent kids is impossible for the omnipotent to achieve the grand place. Thank you for reading in advance. I got banned on another forum asking this.


Edit: question answered: God might killed the kids painlessly and sent them to heaven.

Because God made a judgement, end of. The whole humanity is guilty of sin. God created us to obey and worship Him. Some might have a problem with that, but who has the right to tell the Creator what to create humanity for. If God decided to create us to worship Him, then we were created for that reason, and if we disobey, doesn't God have a right to destroy us? Suppose you create a plate so you can eat out of it, that is the plate's purpose, and when it cracks, don't you destroy it?

Now why did God punish the firstborn? Every single human, and I don't care how old they are, is guilty on sin. When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they did let sin into this world, they infected the whole humanity. Remember, it only takes one sin to come short of glory of the God. That is why Lord Jesus had to come down on Earth and perfectly obey the Father so we who believe in Him may have our sins washed by His blood. God cannot stand sin, yes he may tolerate it for a while, but He cannot look upon sin without wanting to destroy it, remember God is Holy.

It is us, humanity that disobeyed God. God didn't create us to die. However He wanted to give us a free will, so He had to give us a choice to either accept or reject Him. Otherwise if He didn't we wouldn't love Him. And He told us the consequences what would happen if we disobey, that in that moment we will die. He created everything perfectly, He gave us perfection, yet humanity craved to be by Him. And from that moment death entered humanity, each and every single one of us, no matter the age. From that moment on, God can throw us to our deserved eternal punishment whenever He wants. He does not need to save anyone, it is His only mercy that He does. It is not wonder that He punishes people it is however a great wonder He is so forgiving and that He gave His only Son to save us.

Whether the first born went to heaven, I do not know. But they could all went to hell as well, it would have been right for God to do so. For He is the Lord, for He is perfect, we are not, we are His creation that He created for Himself, He has every right to do what He wants with us. He laid the rules and we broke them.

When you accept this, when you repent of your sins, when you tell God you are guilty of God and you accept the blood of Lord Jesus and you tell Him, please Lord, forgive me, and take over my life, He will. Trust me when I tell you, there is nothing better for you than obeying and worshipping God. If only humanity made peace with God, we would have peace here on Earth, but we do not want to, we ask for peace from wars, racism, sexism, rape etc. and we are willing to do anything but go to God, and that is why we will never have peace. We have to come to Lord Jesus

 

[DebbieJ]

Its pretty disturbing that we can make some abominable action morally correct (or vice versa) by just changing the law.

One day interracial marriage is immoral, the next day its morally correct?

Not buying it. Law needs to follow morality, not define it.

If only Pharaoh did not order to kill the male babies of the Hebrews, this wouldn't have ever happened. They fired the first shot and the law was merely applied -- an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Like I said, this has nothing to do with morality, rather justice was served.

Law needs to follow morality. But, can you explain what President Truman did to the Japanese people? Was it a moral thing? How about the judge as per my example?

 

[durangodawood]

If only Pharaoh did not order to kill the male babies of the Hebrews, this wouldn't have ever happened. They fired the first shot and the law was merely applied -- an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Like I said, this has nothing to do with morality, rather justice was served.

The babies of Egypt did not order anything. Pharaoh did. As noted above, if babies are just "property" then your analysis makes sense. But if they are people, then justice was not served, as these children did nothing wrong in the first place.

You take the "eye for eye" from the perpetrator, not from any innocent third party, right? Its unjust to ask uninvolved children to pay for Pharaoh's offense.

...Law needs to follow morality. But, can you explain what President Truman did to the Japanese people? Was it a moral thing? How about the judge as per my example?

Re Truman and the bomb, its a complicated question that relies on a lot of facts-of-the-matter that I havent investigated.

Re your judge, yes executing children for drug crimes is immoral even if the law demands it. Sounds like youre prepared to say that every action thats been permitted under law anywhere in the world was morally correct at the time. Am I understanding you right?

 

[JackRT]

When president Truman approved the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing hundreds of thousands of innocent non-combatant Japanese people which includes women, children, babies, and expectant mothers, nobody accused him of being a murderer or being immoral. Why? Because he didn't break any law and it was justified whether or not it includes the innocent. If that was illegal, then, we can see him as bad as Hitler, a genocidal maniac.

As a student of military history, I am of two minds about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am appalled at the terrible loss of life both at the time and since then due to radiation effects. The total I believe may be several hundred thousand.

On the other hand, the invasion of the Japanese main islands was scheduled for the spring of 1946. Military planners were already well aware that the Japanese defense would be desperate and deadly. The official Japanese slogan of the day was "90 million die together”. The Allied planners were preparing for 6 million casualties in the invasion. It was estimated that 2 million of those would be deaths.

It must have been a heart wrenching decision for Truman to have to make. Remember that he had available only those two bombs. Another six would be available in 1946. He may very well have made the right decision based on the lesser of two evils proposition.

What Truman did not know, and is still little known today, is that the Japanese nuclear program was well advanced and was not years behind but only a few weeks behind. Their main research and development facility was located in what is now North Korea at a location known as Project Z. There is evidence that the Japanese actually conducted a successful nuclear test in the Sea of Japan off the coast of North Korea on the day before the Emperor intervened and forced the Japanese surrender.

Interestingly enough, Project Z fell into the hands of the Russian occupiers of North Korea and Russia was a nuclear power within a few short years.

 

[klutedavid]

Killing children to pay for the sins of their parents... if its "good" that God did this, then we've lost our grip on the word "good". There's no saying what good means anymore.

Good behavior is a mythical human trait, a lofty ethic, and good behavior exhibited by people or nations, is noticeably absent in human history. Slavery, brutality, revolutions, carnage, wars, genocide, that is our history.

From the far distant history to today, multiple philosophers have remarked that human beings appear, by instinct, to behave in a manner with few, if any ideals, and even general morals of whatever kind. (wikipedia, Ideal)

We have not lost our grip on the idea of goodness, actually we never had it in the first place.

Moses warned Pharaoh ten times to release the Hebrews from slavery. I will repeat that again, ten times!

On each occasion, each warning, there were terrible repercussions for Egypt. God had a plan to execute with the Hebrews, a plan to liberate humanity from death and sin. Yet Pharaoh, after such a prolonged refusal to see the writing on the wall, ultimately Egypt paid that great price.

Don't ever look at humanity as innocent and good by nature, for the truth about humanity is the very opposite. Your arguing against our history.

 

[Confused-by-christianity]

According to my understanding, God punished them for enslaving jews, and this is one of the punishment. Why did God punishing innocent kids instead of adults who did the enslaving?

Some of the common responses are 1."Morality does not apply to God" If that's the case, how do to condemn jihad in Islam? They are not bound by morality because they believe God tell them to do it. 2."God is not supposed to be a role model" But Jesus is role model, And Jesus is God. 3."Grand plans, killing to the kids are necessary to achieve it" God is omnipotent. Hard to believe avoiding killing innocent kids is impossible for the omnipotent to achieve the grand place. Thank you for reading in advance. I got banned on another forum asking this.


Edit: question answered: God might killed the kids painlessly and sent them to heaven.

I asked this myself. I had to question a lot of assumptions I had held. Even now, my conclusion has problems with it. (My true answer should be "I don't know").

Some questions I asked myself;
1) Maybe I don't understand Good and Evil as well as I think I do.
2) Maybe I don't understand the meaning of the bible very well.
3) What do we mean by "God is Good".
4) Maybe dying isn't as bad as I think it is.

The list of my thoughts go on, but you get the picture.​

In the end - I think I came to the conclusion that I had assumed dying in this world was bad.

Maybe God doesn't think dying is bad. Isn't that what happens to every living thing on earth in the end anyway? We all go through this experience.

I suppose when humans do it, it's killing - you're removing a life which you do not sustain and have no right to cut off. When God does it - it's His right since it comes from Him anyway.

I think it's a great question though. If you can get a good answer - you'll grow a lot spiritually, so will the faith.

 

[durangodawood]

Good behavior is a mythical human trait, a lofty ethic, and good behavior exhibited by people or nations, is noticeably absent in human history. Slavery, brutality, revolutions, carnage, wars, genocide, that is our history.

From the far distant history to today, multiple philosophers have remarked that human beings appear, by instinct, to behave in a manner with few, if any ideals, and even general morals of whatever kind. (wikipedia, Ideal)

We have not lost our grip on the idea of goodness, actually we never had it in the first place.

Moses warned Pharaoh ten times to release the Hebrews from slavery. I will repeat that again, ten times!

On each occasion, each warning, there were terrible repercussions for Egypt. God had a plan to execute with the Hebrews, a plan to liberate humanity from death and sin. Yet Pharaoh, after such a prolonged refusal to see the writing on the wall, ultimately Egypt paid that great price.

Don't ever look at humanity as innocent and good by nature, for the truth about humanity is the very opposite. Your arguing against our history.

I'm not arguing that humans are or were good.

I'm arguing that we cant even know what the word "good" means if we say a god who does this is "good".

 

[Confused-by-christianity]

Let us not confuse morality with justice.

We cannot accuse a judge for being a murderer just because he sentenced to death 10,000 drug traffickers on a monthly basis by hanging. This includes kids. He is also an executioner for he will be the one to open the trap door. He is merely serving the law and it's penalty. Is this moral or immoral? Who defines it? You?

The law of the land defines what is moral and immoral. We cannot therefore define something as immoral by mere personal opinion or feelings. The law defines the parameter of what is immoral or not.

When president Truman approved the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing hundreds of thousands of innocent non-combatant Japanese people which includes women, children, babies, and expectant mothers, nobody accused him of being a murderer or being immoral. Why? Because he didn't break any law and it was justified whether or not it includes the innocent. If that was illegal, then, we can see him as bad as Hitler, a genocidal maniac.

For example, this is from a movie I've watched. If I killed someone by stabbing out of self-defense, I didn't break any law. But, deep down the mere sight of blood excites me and stabbing the person gives me pleasure, am I immoral? Am I a murderer? I didn't break any law. It was self-defense and the guy just happened to have chosen the wrong person to mess with. I'm not a serial killer and I'm a law abiding citizen. I don't have any criminal records.

If a country does not have any laws and just leave it to one's opinion about morality what is good and bad, we would be living in fear and anxiety as each person has an opinion about morality. A stranger can just barge in into someone's house and take someone's daughter because it is his moral duty to multiply the human race. lol

We need laws, we need penalties, and we need teeth to enforce it.

So, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth was the law of the Lord and it was enforced and the penalty served. There was justice. Pharaoh just happened to mess with the wrong people.

I define morality and justice a little differently, although I admit I'm a novice at this sort of thing.
I define morality as good / evil.
I define justice as the attempt to find stability, peace, harmony or balance - something like a compromise.

People define for themselves what is good and evil. They invariably disagree. Further to disagreeing - one persons moral rights may intrude on another persons moral rights. So who should get their way?

This is where I assumed justice stepped in. I assumed justice to be an attempt to find the compromise between the two parties - that brings about stability, peace, harmony or balance.
(This could be Rawls talking here???? I don't know).

Hopefully - a nation will strive for laws that are both morally good and just (bring about peace harmony and balance.

With this definition, killing a prisoner may be called "just" if the law was followed, but still be evil. It would make those who carried out the act in the name of justice - evil.

I think people confuse morality and justice. They think a justified thing like the death penalty, or a war, is also "righteous", "good" or "moral". That's incorrect (as I see it). The death penalty might bring peace and harmony - but the act itself remains evil.

On a side note:
This is the problem with God killing the firstborn (in my humble opinion) - it makes God out to be justified, but evil. God cannot be evil - so - we are missing something somewhere.
If we can get to the bottom of what we are missing - we can grow. We can also know more about God. Knowing more about God is always Good ;-) .

 

[rturner76]

I define morality and justice a little differently, although I admit I'm a novice at this sort of thing.
I define morality as good / evil.
I define justice as the attempt to find stability, peace, harmony or balance - something like a compromise.

I agree that justice and morality are two different topics.

Morality is about good/evil or right/wrong. I think justice is more about making things equal or regulating equality. However, people must act with morality in order for justice to reign. Also, people with morality will likely want to keep the scales of justice balanced and blindfolded.

 

[mmksparbud]

According to my understanding, God punished them for enslaving jews, and this is one of the punishment. Why did God punishing innocent kids instead of adults who did the enslaving?

Some of the common responses are 1."Morality does not apply to God" If that's the case, how do to condemn jihad in Islam? They are not bound by morality because they believe God tell them to do it. 2."God is not supposed to be a role model" But Jesus is role model, And Jesus is God. 3."Grand plans, killing to the kids are necessary to achieve it" God is omnipotent. Hard to believe avoiding killing innocent kids is impossible for the omnipotent to achieve the grand place. Thank you for reading in advance. I got banned on another forum asking this.


Edit: question answered: God might killed the kids painlessly and sent them to heaven.

With the 10 plagues, God attacked every god of the Egyptians. It was the firstborn that was to officiate at the death ritual of the parents that would send them to the god of the afterlife. This made it impossible for those Egyptians to rely on that ritual for their so called passage to the afterlife. Each plague destroyed one of their gods---this was the last that held them together and He did save it for last, had Pharaoh quite thwarting God before this, it would not have happened.

 

[coffee4u]

Its pretty disturbing that we can make some abominable action morally correct (or vice versa) by just changing the law.

One day interracial marriage is immoral, the next day its morally correct?

Not buying it. Law needs to follow morality, not define it.

That is man's 'moral' law, not God's.
Man may say interracial marriage immoral then change the law to say it is moral and then at some point may even change back again. Countries have changed from being democratic to communist. Man's changeability is disturbing but still, it has nothing to do with God.

Gods morals don't change.
God has no law against interracial marriage and never will.

 

[fwGod]

According to my understanding, God punished them for enslaving jews, and this is one of the punishment. Why did God punishing innocent kids instead of adults who did the enslaving?

The pharaoh intended to have his army kill the first born of the Jews, adults and children alike.

The punishment was the death angel who killed all of the first born among the Egyptians. What are the children? Not first born?
The death angel could not be reasoned with that he must not kill the children.

God protected His people by having them use the blood of animals at their doors to prevent the death angel from killing all within.

Some of the common responses are 1."Morality does not apply to God" If that's the case, how do to condemn jihad in Islam? They are not bound by morality because they believe God tell them to do it.

The Islam is not an example of morality that is equal to God. Islam is the enemy of the Jews, therefore Islam has a different origin for what they believe.

Morality does apply to God. It was His morality that saved His people by the blood of the Passover Lamb.

2."God is not supposed to be a role model" But Jesus is role model, And Jesus is God.

God is and was the role model of every godly man in the Bible. The reasoning that he is not supposed to be our role model is erroneously unscriptural.

3."Grand plans, killing to the kids are necessary to achieve it" God is omnipotent.

With every curse or plague that was released, the Bible indicated that a number of them were released by the pagan priests of the Pharaoh.

God permitted it, not actively sent the death angel.

Hard to believe avoiding killing innocent kids is impossible for the omnipotent to achieve the grand place.

What does bad things happening in the world tell you? Surely if God was omnipotent wouldn't He stop them from happening?

No. His omnipotence is not the factor. It's man's evil decisions that cause bad things to happen.

Since God gave authority to Adam in the garden of Eden. The first bad decision was to disobey God when He said "Don't eat that tree because the day that you do, you will die." Adam ate and he changed from life by God to spiritual death that separated him from God.

It's only those who accept living by His ways that He can and does help those who call upon Him for help.

Because people don't believe God or don't obey Him.. abortion happens because people don't want to take care of helpless babies. The people just want the temporary pleasure of sex, they don't want the consequences of responsibility for their actions. Or children die by accident, by shootings, etc.

God is not responsible for those deaths just as He was not for the children in Egypt.

Edit: question answered: God might killed the kids painlessly and sent them to heaven.

If that was valid then criminals would try using it to argue that it's not a crime. But, killing painlessly is still murder.

Except in battles (in the Bible) where it's either God's people or the enemy (who believe their deity will give them the victory).. where both sides know going in that they could die.. God doesn't call for anyone to take life from anyone.

Those who use the deaths of the first born in Egypt as a way to argue against God's lovingkindness always leave out the part of God protecting His people from death. But that part is the answer in preventing death other than from old age.

 

[NxNW]

Every single human, and I don't care how old they are, is guilty on sin.

How long after conception do humans commit their first sin? One second? Ten minutes? A month?

 

[jayem]

As a non-believer, I have no problem with the story. It’s a myth. Like all myths, it teaches lessons. Here’s another odd detail: Why would the Angel of Death need a sign to avoid killing the Hebrew first-born? Why couldn’t God just impart his omniscience to his hit man? Obviously, part of the message is obedience. If you love and worship God, and obey his commands, those who torment and persecute you will be punished. Let’s also remember that not all Egyptian first-born died. Just the male first-born. (BTW: all first born male animals were also killed.) This clearly reflects the cultural values of the ancient Hebrews. Like all patriarchal societies, women have somewhat lesser worth. So to inflict real damage on an enemy, you slaughter the menfolk.

Like other ancient myths, it may have developed from a real event. There could have been an epidemic of some childhood illness that killed many young people. Through word-of-mouth telling, and re-telling, it was modified into an object lesson about divine revenge on a godless, evil, slaveholding society by the death of all first-born males. But whatever, the Exodus tale as we know it is clearly a human creation which reflects the morality and cultural norms of an ancient people.

 

[coffee4u]

How long after conception do humans commit their first sin? One second? Ten minutes? A month?

It has nothing to do with committing sins, it's the inbuilt sinful nature. We are selfish because of the sinful nature. A small child does not have to be taught to disobey, they have to be taught to obey.