The Story:
Moses told everyone who believed, to spread lambs blood on their front doors, so when the plague passed by, it would not enter their homes. All non-believers (who did not put lambs blood on their doors) would be smited by God, and their first born sons would be killed by the plague.
My Theory:
My theory is that all believers (the Jews) may have stayed awake during the passing of the plague (AKA: the harmful gases from the eruption). Possibly staying awake out of fear, or perhaps to pray, helped them survive the toxic fumes.
All non-believers (the Egyptians) fell asleep, causing them to breath in the toxic fumes and die in their sleep. The same way a gas leak in your home can cause sleeping family members to die, while the others in the home (who are awake) survive.
Why Just The First Borns?:
The documentary stated that the first born Egyptian sons slept in beds closers to the floor, while their siblings slept on rooftops, So after the gas killed the first born sons, it would then rise upwards and dissipate into the air by the time it reached the rooftops, and would be virtually harmless to the other sleeping children. This would explain why the first born sons died and their siblings did not. Mainly because the Egyptians did not believe such a plaque could happen, so they put their children to sleep, which caused them to die, while the slave's children may have stayed awake with their parents, waiting for the passing of the plague.
Who really knows if the "plague" ONLY killed the first born sons of the non-believers? Stories get twisted around over the years, so it is very possible that other people also died as a result of breathing in the gases, perhaps the elderly, the sick or even babies.
Mia (24/F/ Cal.)
Aim: Yakkomia
Myspace: www.myspace.com/yakko_mia
reply
share
siit
17 years ago
Just a comment that Hollywood and people in general take for granted; The 10th plague is 'firstborn' ... the Bible (Ex 11:1 - 12:30) stipulates that its ALL firstborn of man and cattle, beast etc... not just sons, but ALL. Nowhere in Exodus does it state it was firstborn 'sons' only that were to be the target.
Therefore would a firstborn 'girl' be inside while her younger firstborn male sibling be on the roof?
Another interesting point is that it was the blood of the lamb that protected and turned away the plague. Therefore if a 'believer' didn't use the blood, and/or didn't adhere to the preperation and have the right amount of people for the lamb (Ex 12:4), then it is very plausible that the Lord would not pass by but take the firstborn from that dwelling.
I understand the need for people to rationalise apparent God attributed 'miracles' to a scientific logical explanation. But firstborn of all household - including beasts, is hard to justify by a toxic gas....
unless the toxic fumes is fantastically mutated and so sophisticated to distinguish exactly;
1) Blood on a door - whether to bypass or not
2) If no blood, enter and seek out a firstborn human and/or cattle/beast.
3) Kill no others.
thats one super toxic fume - which denotes a sentient intelligence.. and if the fumes DO have the above characteristics, then I put forward that the toxic gas is created from God and proof of his divine power and not some random evolutionary billion/trillion to 1 random chance or fluke.
I find it ironic that a lot of these documentaries want to expand a biblical story, yet dont' follow what the bible says on the matter at hand, and certainly not other parts.
"Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, you will get them"
reply
share
thalilsnoopdogg
17 years ago
it is implied heavily through scripture and a wide variety of non-biblical historical sources that the firstborn is a reference to the son.
brother, you need to read....
more.
reply
share