- Nov 26, 2007
- 1,639
- 400
- 34
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Celibate
- Politics
- US-American-Solidarity
Pax, Ειρήνη, שלום! Christ is Risen!!!
I have long been of the strong opinion that anyone seeking to understand the Old Testament, most especially Genesis & the Holy Torah, must have at least some understanding of Ancient Egypt. Indeed, as an instituted Reader of the Catholic Church, I am to study Scripture assiduously; part of that, for me, is to take time to study Ancient Egypt in a disciplined manner. Egypt was the crucible of the most important events of the Holy Torah, and, moreover, is a sort of golden thread throughout all of Scripture due to this initial influence.
Of particular fascination to many, both lay Biblical students & academic scholars, is the period of the domination of the Hyksos over Egypt in the 15th dynasty (roughly). These were likely peoples of Western Semitic, probably Levantine origin, who – through the use of superior weaponry and internal weaknesses of the 14th dynasty – essentially ended the aforenoted dynasty, ruling lower Egypt from the Delta city of Avaris. I note in passing that the Land of Goshen, where the Hebrews dwelt, is near Avaris in the eastern Delta. The name of the Hyksos means "rulers of foreign lands" (Egyptian: hekau khasut) rather than the erroneous "shepherd kings" recorded by Flavius Josephus. While they were certainly originally Canaanites, they quickly adopted Egyptian culture. Their leaders took on the roles of pharaohs.
For a long time, due in part to the characterization of the writings of the Egyptian priest, Manetho, they were seen as violent conquerors. Yet, recent evidence demonstrates that they probably slowly migrated into Egypt over a long period of time, and eventually grew numerous enough to supplant the 14th dynasty (cf. Ex. 1:9). This, intriguingly, suggests a connection – however tenuous – to the account in Genesis and the role of Joseph (a Hebrew Canaanite) as Grand Vizier; perhaps even to a Hyksos Pharaoh. But these speculations are not the focus of this treatise.
As a student of both Scripture and comparative ancient religion, I am fascinated by the Hyksos devotion to the Egyptian "god," Set (Egyptian: "Sutekh"). Prior to the coming of the Hyksos, Set was understood in an ambivalent, and sometimes even positive light. He is most famous for the myth of his antagonism towards Horus, yet this is a later myth that may perhaps be influenced by the history of the Hyksos in Egypt. Regardless, Set has attributes that are extremely similar, almost tantalizingly so, to Canaanite "gods"...notably the God of Israel, the Lord (I personally refuse to type the Tetragrammaton, much less add vowels to it; hence the God of Israel, when named, will be Lord henceforth, as per Jewish & Christian tradition).
To begin, it's important to understand how pre-Hyksos Egypt understood this deity. Set in early times was seen as benevolent "god." In fact, his cult was one of the oldest in Egypt, and he seems to have been a chthonic deity related to the underworld. Egyptians would pray to him to help their deceased family. In this regard, Set was the father of the more well-recognized Anubis. Moreover, Set had a role as the defender of the "god," Ra. As many might know, Ra was one of the most important deities of the Egyptian pantheon as the deity of the sun, order, kings, and the sky. According to early legends, Ra was threatened by a primordial serpent of chaos, darkness, and disorder: Apep. In one legend, Set comes to the aid of Ra and fights off Apep, effectively saving Ra & preserving the proper order of the cosmos.
This "heroic" Set is quite different from what would come later.
And it's likely that the Hyksos played a major role in that, in my opinion. According to many sources, Set became the "patron" deity of the Hyksos. One text records that the Hyksos pharaoh, Apophis "chose for his lord the god Set. He did not worship any other deity in the whole land except Set." This monolatrism is quite curious given the deeply polytheistic nature of Ancient Egyptian society. Moreover, why Set at all? The answer is rather simple: the Canaanite Hyksos saw in Set a parallel to their own "gods." In particular, Canaanites worshipped a variety of deities associated with storms, weather, rain, fertility, and thunder. They generally referred to this deity as "Ba'al" ("lord"), a general title, or gave them specific names like Hadad, Chemosh, Molech, etc.
The deity Ba'al, as a unique figure, played an important role in the Ba'al Cycle of Ugaritic texts, wherein he slays the sea serpent, Yam ("sea"), a creature of chaos. He does this for his father, El, the supreme Semitic deity. The parallel with Set as defender of Ra against Apep was rather noticeable. Hence, it is not surprising that the Hyksos adopted Set as a patronal deity and showed little interest in native Egyptian ones initially. Moreover, intriguingly, Set for the Hyksos was understood as having both Astarte and Anat as consorts (both uniquely Canaanite "goddesses" often idolatrously paired with the Lord by apostate Israelites). This points to Set as being seen as equivalent to a Ba'al of some kind.
All that explanation aside, I wonder strongly if the Patriarch Joseph, whilst in Egypt understood the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as reflected in Set. This is not to say that Joseph saw the Lord & Set as equivalent! Not at all. Joseph's God, the Lord, was a tribal God who was patron of his family, and, most likely other Hebrews who had followed Abraham as tribal leader. Keep in mind too that this was not yet the time when the Lord revealed Himself completely to the Hebrews, although they likely knew His Name at varying times (Gen. 4:26), if only derivatively. The revelation of "I am who I am" appears to be Mosaic in nature, and provides the "explanation" for the Tetragrammaton ("He Who Is").
That said, there are a number of important similarities between Joseph's God, the Lord, and Set. There are clues that, at the least, the Pharaoh who made Joseph his Grand Vizier saw the Hebrew God as a form of Set. This wasn't at all uncommon in the ancient world. Many peoples when, encountering foreign deities, would associate them with "gods" they already knew. Here now I will lay out my case that Set & the Lord were considered functionally equivalent by the Pharaoh of Joseph, and, most likely, the Egyptian people of the time:
The first clue is in the Bible itself, quite fittingly. The Lord is described in many ways, but a good summary is in Deut. 33:26-28. The Lord is a God who controls the weather, gives fertility, engages in warfare (heavenly & tribal), orders the seasons, leads the hosts (stars), controls the sun & moon, hurls lightning & fire as his weaponry, keeps checks on the bounds of the sea, communicates in dreams, speaks via prophets or seers, dwells upon or is associated with sacred mountains, and is King over all the "gods" & the "divine council." In this way, the Lord actually uniquely combines Canaanite ideas about their deities into a single God. To early Hebrews & to polytheistic Canaanites, the Lord is simultaneously: El (Elyon), Ba'al, Hadad, Resheph, Ba'al Shamim, El Shaddai, Nebo, Shamash, etc. This ability to transcend roles played by separate deities is part of what makes the revelation of God to Abraham so unique: He is beyond the "gods of the nations," and is sufficient in Himself...and for His People. Baruch HaShem l'olamim! Amein.
In any case, there are numerous similarities with how an ancient Hebrew might describe his God with the Egyptian Set. This, especially when we consider the positive view of Set in earlier times & during Hyksos rule. Many know that the Pharaoh gave Joseph a title after he successfully interpreted his dream. It is recorded in Gen. 41:45 as "Zaphnath-Paaneah" (צָפְנַת פַּעְנֵחַ). This is a Hebrew equivalent for the Egyptian: "Djed-pa-Netjer-iu-ef-Ankh" – "The god (Set?) speaks and he lives." Moreover, Set was understood as the lord of Upper Egypt (i.e. southern Egypt), and so was associated with drought & the deserts. Contrary to popular belief, cycles of drought and flooding were parts of everyday Egyptian life and farming. Note too that in the Joseph narrative, there are 7 years of drought & 7 years of plenty. This type of weather-related drought is a clear indication of a Sethian image, as well as that of the Lord (cf. Hag. 1:11). Moreover, the Lord is depicted frequently in the OT as a "God of the Wilderness" (Ex. 3:18 and throughout the Holy Torah). This would have been readily recognizable to the Egyptians & Hyksos as a Sethian motif. Moreover, the Lord – like Set – is understood as having destroyed the chaos monster of the sea. In Hebrew mythos, this is the being called "Leviathan" (לִוְיָתָן). The name is derived from the earlier Ugaritic "Lôtān." Both names mean "the coiling/twisting one" or something along those lines. In the Ba'al Cycle, it is Ba'al Hadad who slays Lôtān. In the inspired Bible it is the Lord, rather, who not only slays Leviathan, but provides its corpse as food to those in the wilderness (Ps. 74:14). Keep in mind that "wilderness" usually indicates deserts or desert-like conditions.
Naturally however, there are problems. The first are chronological issues which have still to be resolved. We are not certain when Joseph thrived, nor are we able to easily position his life within the 15th dynasty of Hyksos rule. Additionally, this is a very early time in Hebrew religious development. St. Moses the Prophet had not yet come; and even after his time, the Hebrews seem to only slowly move towards monotheism from more primitive henotheistic and monolatrist views of the Lord.
Yet, I contend, the problems are not insurmountable, nor do they take away from the value of this sense that Set & the Lord were considered functional equivalents. Indeed, I would go so far as to say this pagan idea may be evidence for the reality of the Exodus!
Not long after the Hyksos were subjugated and/or driven out by the native Egyptians, Set underwent a deleterious downgrade. No longer seen as beneficial, he becomes associated with darkness, destructive drought & storms, desertification, and chaos. He plays the villain in the crucial myth of Horus, who becomes seen as a more authentically "Egyptian" deity in contrast to Set. Xenophobia of Semitic peoples sets in and becomes tied to Set within Egyptian religion. He is still venerated and worshipped, but much as a Viking might pay homage to Loki or an ancient Greek might honor Typhon. And this is fascinating in the context of the Plagues of the Exodus.
Many are already aware that the Plagues of the Exodus are God judging the "gods" of the Egyptians (Ex. 12:12). Each plague corresponds to demonstrating the impotency of an important Egyptian "god" who played important roles in Egyptian society:
I. Water Turned to Blood (Hapi)
II. Frogs Coming From the Nile (Hekhet)
III. Lice From the Earth's Dust (Geb)
IV. Swarms of Flies (Khepri)
V. Death of Cattle and Livestock (Hathor)
VI. Ashes Turned to Boils and Sores (Isis)
VII. Hail in the Form of Fire (Nut)
VIII. Locusts Sent From the Sky (Osiris)
IX. Three Days of Complete Darkness (Ra, Horus, Amun)
X. Death of the Firstborn (Pharaoh)
Some have mistakenly seen God attacking/judging Set with the locusts, but this is due to anachronism & the fact that the plagues are multivalent attacks. Set did not protect Egypt from locusts...if anything, he often sent them! Osiris, however, was the primary guardian of the land's fertility & agriculture. Thus, the Lord is judging Osiris, which is a pretty big deal in terms of Egyptian mythology & religion! God is saying "I Am stronger than death!"
This curious absence of Set in the plagues is not coincidental. It is likely that the Egyptians did not understand who this "God of the Hebrews" was. As the Pharaoh of the Exodus states clearly: “But Pharaoh said, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord, and moreover, I will not let Israel go.’” (Ex. 5:2). The Egyptians, if pressed, probably associated Him with Set or some other foreign deity. Regardless, the sheer panic and fear that the Lord brought upon Egypt far exceeded Set, yet also was consistent with the chaotic activity associated with him. Indeed, the fact that the Israelites are set free and despoil the Egyptians in the process isn't surprising. If Horus, Ra, Isis, and Osiris could not protect Egypt, then getting the Hebrews out ASAP was quite understandable!
One final point: Why did Pharaoh chase after St. Moses and the Hebrews? Many would say it was the hardness of his heart or the economic losses from the exodus of so many workmen. The Holy Torah itself is ambiguous, merely saying: “When the king of Egypt was told that the people had fled, the mind of Pharaoh and his servants was changed toward the people, and they said, ‘What is this we have done, that we have let Israel go from serving us?’” (Ex. 14:5). Yet, there may be a religious answer that has been long forgotten. If the Egyptians saw Set as the God of the Hebrews, then to be so abased by Set (especially in the context of the Horus Myth) would be utterly intolerable. The Pharaoh was the keeper of ma'at (justice; cosmic order). He was considered Horus in life, and then Osiris in death (after which he was deified). As the embodiment of these religious beliefs, the Plagues of the Lord were degrading beyond words. Hence, one can religiously explain Pharaoh mustering such a massive & powerful force (Ex. 14:6-9) to chase down the Israelites. Among his other desires, one was surely the intention of wreaking not only personal vengeance but avenging the honor of his "gods."
So ends now my theory. I welcome respectful criticism, disagreements, and additional thoughts that may help or correct my perspective as outlined here. And I end with a verse dear to my heart:
"Who is like You, O Lord, among the gods? Who is like You, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?" (Ex. 15:11)
מִי־כָמֹכָה בָּאֵלֶם יָה' מִי כָּמֹכָה נֶאְדָּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ נוֹרָא תְהִלֹּת עֹשֵׂה פֶלֶא׃
I have long been of the strong opinion that anyone seeking to understand the Old Testament, most especially Genesis & the Holy Torah, must have at least some understanding of Ancient Egypt. Indeed, as an instituted Reader of the Catholic Church, I am to study Scripture assiduously; part of that, for me, is to take time to study Ancient Egypt in a disciplined manner. Egypt was the crucible of the most important events of the Holy Torah, and, moreover, is a sort of golden thread throughout all of Scripture due to this initial influence.
Of particular fascination to many, both lay Biblical students & academic scholars, is the period of the domination of the Hyksos over Egypt in the 15th dynasty (roughly). These were likely peoples of Western Semitic, probably Levantine origin, who – through the use of superior weaponry and internal weaknesses of the 14th dynasty – essentially ended the aforenoted dynasty, ruling lower Egypt from the Delta city of Avaris. I note in passing that the Land of Goshen, where the Hebrews dwelt, is near Avaris in the eastern Delta. The name of the Hyksos means "rulers of foreign lands" (Egyptian: hekau khasut) rather than the erroneous "shepherd kings" recorded by Flavius Josephus. While they were certainly originally Canaanites, they quickly adopted Egyptian culture. Their leaders took on the roles of pharaohs.
For a long time, due in part to the characterization of the writings of the Egyptian priest, Manetho, they were seen as violent conquerors. Yet, recent evidence demonstrates that they probably slowly migrated into Egypt over a long period of time, and eventually grew numerous enough to supplant the 14th dynasty (cf. Ex. 1:9). This, intriguingly, suggests a connection – however tenuous – to the account in Genesis and the role of Joseph (a Hebrew Canaanite) as Grand Vizier; perhaps even to a Hyksos Pharaoh. But these speculations are not the focus of this treatise.
As a student of both Scripture and comparative ancient religion, I am fascinated by the Hyksos devotion to the Egyptian "god," Set (Egyptian: "Sutekh"). Prior to the coming of the Hyksos, Set was understood in an ambivalent, and sometimes even positive light. He is most famous for the myth of his antagonism towards Horus, yet this is a later myth that may perhaps be influenced by the history of the Hyksos in Egypt. Regardless, Set has attributes that are extremely similar, almost tantalizingly so, to Canaanite "gods"...notably the God of Israel, the Lord (I personally refuse to type the Tetragrammaton, much less add vowels to it; hence the God of Israel, when named, will be Lord henceforth, as per Jewish & Christian tradition).
To begin, it's important to understand how pre-Hyksos Egypt understood this deity. Set in early times was seen as benevolent "god." In fact, his cult was one of the oldest in Egypt, and he seems to have been a chthonic deity related to the underworld. Egyptians would pray to him to help their deceased family. In this regard, Set was the father of the more well-recognized Anubis. Moreover, Set had a role as the defender of the "god," Ra. As many might know, Ra was one of the most important deities of the Egyptian pantheon as the deity of the sun, order, kings, and the sky. According to early legends, Ra was threatened by a primordial serpent of chaos, darkness, and disorder: Apep. In one legend, Set comes to the aid of Ra and fights off Apep, effectively saving Ra & preserving the proper order of the cosmos.
This "heroic" Set is quite different from what would come later.
And it's likely that the Hyksos played a major role in that, in my opinion. According to many sources, Set became the "patron" deity of the Hyksos. One text records that the Hyksos pharaoh, Apophis "chose for his lord the god Set. He did not worship any other deity in the whole land except Set." This monolatrism is quite curious given the deeply polytheistic nature of Ancient Egyptian society. Moreover, why Set at all? The answer is rather simple: the Canaanite Hyksos saw in Set a parallel to their own "gods." In particular, Canaanites worshipped a variety of deities associated with storms, weather, rain, fertility, and thunder. They generally referred to this deity as "Ba'al" ("lord"), a general title, or gave them specific names like Hadad, Chemosh, Molech, etc.
The deity Ba'al, as a unique figure, played an important role in the Ba'al Cycle of Ugaritic texts, wherein he slays the sea serpent, Yam ("sea"), a creature of chaos. He does this for his father, El, the supreme Semitic deity. The parallel with Set as defender of Ra against Apep was rather noticeable. Hence, it is not surprising that the Hyksos adopted Set as a patronal deity and showed little interest in native Egyptian ones initially. Moreover, intriguingly, Set for the Hyksos was understood as having both Astarte and Anat as consorts (both uniquely Canaanite "goddesses" often idolatrously paired with the Lord by apostate Israelites). This points to Set as being seen as equivalent to a Ba'al of some kind.
All that explanation aside, I wonder strongly if the Patriarch Joseph, whilst in Egypt understood the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as reflected in Set. This is not to say that Joseph saw the Lord & Set as equivalent! Not at all. Joseph's God, the Lord, was a tribal God who was patron of his family, and, most likely other Hebrews who had followed Abraham as tribal leader. Keep in mind too that this was not yet the time when the Lord revealed Himself completely to the Hebrews, although they likely knew His Name at varying times (Gen. 4:26), if only derivatively. The revelation of "I am who I am" appears to be Mosaic in nature, and provides the "explanation" for the Tetragrammaton ("He Who Is").
That said, there are a number of important similarities between Joseph's God, the Lord, and Set. There are clues that, at the least, the Pharaoh who made Joseph his Grand Vizier saw the Hebrew God as a form of Set. This wasn't at all uncommon in the ancient world. Many peoples when, encountering foreign deities, would associate them with "gods" they already knew. Here now I will lay out my case that Set & the Lord were considered functionally equivalent by the Pharaoh of Joseph, and, most likely, the Egyptian people of the time:
The first clue is in the Bible itself, quite fittingly. The Lord is described in many ways, but a good summary is in Deut. 33:26-28. The Lord is a God who controls the weather, gives fertility, engages in warfare (heavenly & tribal), orders the seasons, leads the hosts (stars), controls the sun & moon, hurls lightning & fire as his weaponry, keeps checks on the bounds of the sea, communicates in dreams, speaks via prophets or seers, dwells upon or is associated with sacred mountains, and is King over all the "gods" & the "divine council." In this way, the Lord actually uniquely combines Canaanite ideas about their deities into a single God. To early Hebrews & to polytheistic Canaanites, the Lord is simultaneously: El (Elyon), Ba'al, Hadad, Resheph, Ba'al Shamim, El Shaddai, Nebo, Shamash, etc. This ability to transcend roles played by separate deities is part of what makes the revelation of God to Abraham so unique: He is beyond the "gods of the nations," and is sufficient in Himself...and for His People. Baruch HaShem l'olamim! Amein.
In any case, there are numerous similarities with how an ancient Hebrew might describe his God with the Egyptian Set. This, especially when we consider the positive view of Set in earlier times & during Hyksos rule. Many know that the Pharaoh gave Joseph a title after he successfully interpreted his dream. It is recorded in Gen. 41:45 as "Zaphnath-Paaneah" (צָפְנַת פַּעְנֵחַ). This is a Hebrew equivalent for the Egyptian: "Djed-pa-Netjer-iu-ef-Ankh" – "The god (Set?) speaks and he lives." Moreover, Set was understood as the lord of Upper Egypt (i.e. southern Egypt), and so was associated with drought & the deserts. Contrary to popular belief, cycles of drought and flooding were parts of everyday Egyptian life and farming. Note too that in the Joseph narrative, there are 7 years of drought & 7 years of plenty. This type of weather-related drought is a clear indication of a Sethian image, as well as that of the Lord (cf. Hag. 1:11). Moreover, the Lord is depicted frequently in the OT as a "God of the Wilderness" (Ex. 3:18 and throughout the Holy Torah). This would have been readily recognizable to the Egyptians & Hyksos as a Sethian motif. Moreover, the Lord – like Set – is understood as having destroyed the chaos monster of the sea. In Hebrew mythos, this is the being called "Leviathan" (לִוְיָתָן). The name is derived from the earlier Ugaritic "Lôtān." Both names mean "the coiling/twisting one" or something along those lines. In the Ba'al Cycle, it is Ba'al Hadad who slays Lôtān. In the inspired Bible it is the Lord, rather, who not only slays Leviathan, but provides its corpse as food to those in the wilderness (Ps. 74:14). Keep in mind that "wilderness" usually indicates deserts or desert-like conditions.
Naturally however, there are problems. The first are chronological issues which have still to be resolved. We are not certain when Joseph thrived, nor are we able to easily position his life within the 15th dynasty of Hyksos rule. Additionally, this is a very early time in Hebrew religious development. St. Moses the Prophet had not yet come; and even after his time, the Hebrews seem to only slowly move towards monotheism from more primitive henotheistic and monolatrist views of the Lord.
Yet, I contend, the problems are not insurmountable, nor do they take away from the value of this sense that Set & the Lord were considered functional equivalents. Indeed, I would go so far as to say this pagan idea may be evidence for the reality of the Exodus!
Not long after the Hyksos were subjugated and/or driven out by the native Egyptians, Set underwent a deleterious downgrade. No longer seen as beneficial, he becomes associated with darkness, destructive drought & storms, desertification, and chaos. He plays the villain in the crucial myth of Horus, who becomes seen as a more authentically "Egyptian" deity in contrast to Set. Xenophobia of Semitic peoples sets in and becomes tied to Set within Egyptian religion. He is still venerated and worshipped, but much as a Viking might pay homage to Loki or an ancient Greek might honor Typhon. And this is fascinating in the context of the Plagues of the Exodus.
Many are already aware that the Plagues of the Exodus are God judging the "gods" of the Egyptians (Ex. 12:12). Each plague corresponds to demonstrating the impotency of an important Egyptian "god" who played important roles in Egyptian society:
I. Water Turned to Blood (Hapi)
II. Frogs Coming From the Nile (Hekhet)
III. Lice From the Earth's Dust (Geb)
IV. Swarms of Flies (Khepri)
V. Death of Cattle and Livestock (Hathor)
VI. Ashes Turned to Boils and Sores (Isis)
VII. Hail in the Form of Fire (Nut)
VIII. Locusts Sent From the Sky (Osiris)
IX. Three Days of Complete Darkness (Ra, Horus, Amun)
X. Death of the Firstborn (Pharaoh)
Some have mistakenly seen God attacking/judging Set with the locusts, but this is due to anachronism & the fact that the plagues are multivalent attacks. Set did not protect Egypt from locusts...if anything, he often sent them! Osiris, however, was the primary guardian of the land's fertility & agriculture. Thus, the Lord is judging Osiris, which is a pretty big deal in terms of Egyptian mythology & religion! God is saying "I Am stronger than death!"
This curious absence of Set in the plagues is not coincidental. It is likely that the Egyptians did not understand who this "God of the Hebrews" was. As the Pharaoh of the Exodus states clearly: “But Pharaoh said, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord, and moreover, I will not let Israel go.’” (Ex. 5:2). The Egyptians, if pressed, probably associated Him with Set or some other foreign deity. Regardless, the sheer panic and fear that the Lord brought upon Egypt far exceeded Set, yet also was consistent with the chaotic activity associated with him. Indeed, the fact that the Israelites are set free and despoil the Egyptians in the process isn't surprising. If Horus, Ra, Isis, and Osiris could not protect Egypt, then getting the Hebrews out ASAP was quite understandable!
One final point: Why did Pharaoh chase after St. Moses and the Hebrews? Many would say it was the hardness of his heart or the economic losses from the exodus of so many workmen. The Holy Torah itself is ambiguous, merely saying: “When the king of Egypt was told that the people had fled, the mind of Pharaoh and his servants was changed toward the people, and they said, ‘What is this we have done, that we have let Israel go from serving us?’” (Ex. 14:5). Yet, there may be a religious answer that has been long forgotten. If the Egyptians saw Set as the God of the Hebrews, then to be so abased by Set (especially in the context of the Horus Myth) would be utterly intolerable. The Pharaoh was the keeper of ma'at (justice; cosmic order). He was considered Horus in life, and then Osiris in death (after which he was deified). As the embodiment of these religious beliefs, the Plagues of the Lord were degrading beyond words. Hence, one can religiously explain Pharaoh mustering such a massive & powerful force (Ex. 14:6-9) to chase down the Israelites. Among his other desires, one was surely the intention of wreaking not only personal vengeance but avenging the honor of his "gods."
So ends now my theory. I welcome respectful criticism, disagreements, and additional thoughts that may help or correct my perspective as outlined here. And I end with a verse dear to my heart:
"Who is like You, O Lord, among the gods? Who is like You, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?" (Ex. 15:11)
מִי־כָמֹכָה בָּאֵלֶם יָה' מִי כָּמֹכָה נֶאְדָּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ נוֹרָא תְהִלֹּת עֹשֵׂה פֶלֶא׃
Last edited:
