"And it came to pass that at midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon. And Pharaoh rose up in the night. . . and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead." (Ex.12.30).

Perhaps Pharaoh had not really believed that this would happen. Blinded, maybe, by his own egotism and arrogance he might have reasoned that every one of the nine plagues had been lifted; the damage they had done was grievous, but not irremediable. The God of Moses had shown Himself possessed of marvellous powers in the world of Nature and had used those powers considerably to increase the magnitude of events which on a smaller scale were by no means unknown in Egypt. But to single out of all Egypt's multitudes the firstborn son of each family and encompass the sudden death of all such simultaneously on the stroke of midnight: Pharaoh knew of no gods having such power and he had dismissed Moses' final denunciation, a little uneasy perhaps but dismissed it nevertheless, as the despairing defiance of a defeated man. Now he knew better, and it was too late!

The literal historicity of the death of the firstborns is the only explanation of the existence of the Passover feast. The very centre and core of the whole arrangement, and of much of Israel's religious organisation in after years, rests upon the fact that all the firstborns of Egypt did die under the hand of God on that fateful night. Without that dread happening the Passover could have had no meaning and would never have been repeated. However inexplicable the proceeding—and the singular nature of the selection, firstborn only in every house except those marked with the blood, rules out every explanation save direct action by Divine intervention—it must have happened in the fashion described.

Egyptian history is silent on this event and the name of Pharaoh's firstborn son is not known. But there is one significant fact. The son who did succeed him was Thothmes IV, and he is well known in history. In 1886 the Egyptologist Maspero, engaged in clearing the sand which buried the lower half of the Sphinx, the huge half man, half animal monument situated near the Great Pyramid of Ghizeh, discovered between the great paws of the figure a small altar with an inscribed tablet, hitherto unknown. When deciphered, the tablet was found to be the record of a remarkable dream experienced by Thothmes IV when a youth, before his accession. It seems that the lad had been out hunting with his servants, lain down in the shadow of the Sphinx to rest, and fallen asleep. In his dream the Sphinx-god spoke to him and promised that if he would clear away the sand which even then partially buried the monument then he should one day become Pharaoh of Egypt. Upon awaking, Thothmes was so impressed that he carried out his part of the bargain; when he did succeed to the throne he erected the tablet in the place where he had slept. The significant thing about this is that Thothmes was evidently not the eldest son of Amen-hotep or there had been no need to make this bargain to ensure his succession. In Egypt the eldest son invariably succeeded his father as Pharaoh. The obvious inference is that for a reason not stated in Egyptian history the eldest son of Amen-hotep died before his father so that the younger one succeeded. That is strong supporting evidence for the truth of the Biblical account.

How does this wholesale destruction of firstborn, with all the anguish and mental suffering it must have involved, appear in relation to the Divine character? God is love and these slain firstborns were the creation of his hands. He had given them life; now in a moment He deprived them of life. Was it not possible for God, who has all power, to deliver his people without involving the sudden death of probably several hundred thousand innocent firstborns? The answer to such questions is not easy; it involves the whole philosophy of the permission of evil. To say that God is the giver of life and has every right to withdraw life at his pleasure is not a complete nor a satisfactory answer. It is true that in past times God had visited whole peoples with judgment on account of their depravity—the antediluvians, the men of Sodom and Gomorrah, and so on—but there is no evidence that all the slain firstborns were depraved. And what then of their eternal future? The situation is only tolerable when it is understood that this life is only one phase of man's development into the Divine ideal. The death of the firstborns was not an irreparable loss; they did not die without hope; there is more yet to come. In the words of a famous theologian, Dr. Farrar, Archdeacon of Westminster, "man's destiny stops not at the grave; many who knew not Christ here will know him there. In some way or other, before the final verdict, God's mercy may reach them and the benefits of Christ's atonement be extended to them beyond the grave." And it might well be that necessity existed to demonstrate at this time the fact that all men are members one of another, that for reasons which are too deep for the human mind to grasp the evil of one man cannot but have its repercussion upon others. The death of the firstborn was primarily the consequence of Pharaoh's hardness of heart. Was this terrible outcome a measure of the fearful gulf which Pharaoh had created between himself and every right thought and action. As Dr. Farrar said again in another place "It is impossible for us to estimate the hardening effect of obstinate persistence in evil, and the power of the human will to resist the law and reject the love of God."

Pharaoh gave in. Before morning dawned he had sent messengers to Moses and Aaron and bidden them muster all Israel and get out of Egypt. It is not necessary to read vs. 31 to imply that he spoke personally to Moses. He had already seen the prophet for the last time. Probably his officials went post haste to Moses' residence with the royal mandate. According to vs. 33 they were anxious to expedite the people's departure, fearing yet further visitations of Israel's God. "We be all dead men" they said. The sooner Pharaoh's edict was acted upon the better.

The implication of ch.12.vs.34,39,42 and 51 is that the great migration commenced that same night. The people had no time even to prepare food for the journey before leaving their homes. The smiting of the firstborns occurred at midnight; affairs must have moved fast if the people or even a proportion of them were on the move by 6.00am and this is what the account implies. It is certain that every detail of the move had been organised beforehand. Even so it was not humanly possible for the command to be transmitted throughout the land of Goshen, more than a hundred miles in extent, within an hour or so, unless a system of signalling such as the use of beacon fires had been already arranged. It is evident that all Israel fully believed that this time the word would be given and they were ready. Verse 37 indicates a general gathering at the town of Succoth on the southern border of Goshen preparatory to an organised move toward the Red Sea. The verse states that they journeyed from Rameses to Succoth; it is likely that the Israelites in and around the capital city of Rameses had the news first and were early on the move. Those scattered throughout the country districts would be informed a little later and then join the travelling bands. It might have been several days or even weeks before all Israel was congregated together at Succoth and the real journey into the wilderness began.

But to Moses the moment for which he had planned and laboured these forty years past came when the Egyptian messengers stood before him in the darkness of that Passover night with their royal master's urgent plea "Rise up, go forth from among my people, both you and the people of Israel and go, serve the Lord as you have said. Take your flocks and your herds and be gone, and bless me also." (Ex.12.31-32)

AOH