What does Exodus 1:20 reveal about God's view on civil disobedience? Historical and Cultural Background Around 1446 BC, Pharaoh Thutmose III (or, on the late-date view, Ramesses II) commanded genocide against Israelite boys (Exodus 1:15-16). Archaeological strata at Avaris reveal a sudden Semitic demographic surge consistent with the biblical Goshen settlement (Bietak, 1996). Contemporary Egyptian medical papyri (e.g., Kahun Gynecological Papyrus) show professional midwifery, matching the narrative’s realism. Analysis of the Passage 1. Pharaoh issues an unlawful decree. 2. Shiphrah and Puah fear (יָרֵא yārēʾ) God more than the king (v.17). 3. God “was good” to them (v.20) and “made them households” (v.21). The divine response is not neutral; it is overt blessing for defiance of murderous state policy. Divine Evaluation The text makes moral judgment explicit: preserving life in obedience to God’s higher law invites divine commendation even when it violates human edict. This pattern anchors a theology of principled civil disobedience. Biblical Theology of Civil Obedience and Disobedience • Normal posture: submission (Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-17). • Limiting clause: “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). • Precedents: – Joseph and Mary protect the infant Jesus from Herod (Matthew 2:13-15). – Daniel’s prayer (Daniel 6) and his friends’ refusal to worship an idol (Daniel 3). Exodus 1:20 stands at the fountainhead of this biblical tension: governmental authority is derivative and forfeits moral legitimacy when commanding sin (Proverbs 29:2). Sanctity of Life and the Imago Dei Genesis 1:27 grounds human worth in the image of God. The midwives’ refusal anticipates later pro-life injunctions: “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13) and “Rescue those being led away to death” (Proverbs 24:11). The passage thus speaks prophetically to abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia. Comparative Passages • Hebrews 11:23 praises Moses’ parents for hiding him. • Revelation 13 contrasts beastly totalitarianism with saints who “keep the commandments of God.” These links show biblical consistency: civil disobedience is justified only when civil demand contradicts explicit divine command or moral law. Historical Examples and Modern Implications • Early Church midwifes rescuing exposed infants in Rome (Apostolic Constitutions 8.4). • Corrie ten Boom hiding Jews, citing Acts 5:29. • Modern physicians refusing to perform abortions. All echo Exodus 1:20’s paradigm: fear God, preserve life, accept consequences, expect eternal reward. Pastoral and Behavioral Applications 1. Examine decrees: Does the command contradict Scripture? 2. Fear God first: cultivate reverence through worship and Scripture saturation. 3. Act to preserve life: practical steps may include protest, shelter, advocacy. 4. Accept risk: blessing may be material or eternal; faithfulness, not outcome, is the goal. 5. Teach next generation: instill courage by recounting biblical and historical examples. Concluding Summary Exodus 1:20 reveals that when state authority mandates sin, God endorses and rewards civil disobedience that upholds His higher moral law—especially the protection of innocent life. The passage integrates seamlessly with the whole counsel of Scripture, affirming the believer’s obligation to submit to rulers right up to the point that such submission would entail defiance of God. |
    |