Why did the king of Egypt question the midwives' actions in Exodus 1:18? Historical Setting of Exodus 1:18 Egypt’s Eighteenth Dynasty, ca. 1526 BC (conservative/Ussher chronology), had absorbed Jacob’s family of seventy men (Genesis 46:27). Within four centuries, “the Israelites were fruitful and multiplied greatly” (Exodus 1:7). A new Pharaoh, ignorant of Joseph’s service, feared that this Semitic minority—now numbering well over two million—might join Egypt’s enemies (Exodus 1:9–10). His population-control program unfolded in three escalating steps: (1) forced labor (vv. 11–14), (2) covert male infanticide through Hebrew midwives (vv. 15–16), and (3) the public decree to drown baby boys in the Nile (v. 22). Exodus 1:18 records the moment Pharaoh realized that phase two had failed. Identity and Standing of the Midwives Shiphrah (“fair,” “bright”) and Puah (“splendid,” “fragrant”) bear Semitic names, consistent with their being Hebrews. Their very mention underscores their historicity; Egyptian records such as the Kahun Gynaecological Papyrus (c. 1800 BC) document an organized guild of midwives, corroborating the biblical portrayal. Because midwives dealt daily with childbirth, Pharaoh assumed they would quietly eliminate male infants before the surrounding community noticed. Pharaoh’s Question Explained “Then the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and asked them, ‘Why have you done this and allowed the boys to live?’” (Exodus 1:18). The interrogation arises from four converging factors: 1. Obvious Non-Compliance – Despite the royal edict, robust Hebrew boys continued appearing in slave-labor crews and village lanes. Civil authorities could count. 2. Political Urgency – Pharaoh needed data: Was the failure due to midwife sabotage or biological inevitability? The answer would shape his next legislative step. 3. Expectation of Absolute Obedience – In Egyptian society the king was semidivine; defiance from foreign slave-women was unthinkable. His shock underscores the boldness of their civil disobedience. 4. Preservation of Plausible Deniability – A whispered plan would let Pharaoh later deny intending genocide. Questioning the women provided a thin veneer of judicial process. The Midwives’ Defense “They replied to Pharaoh, ‘Hebrew women are vigorous and give birth before the midwife arrives’” (Exodus 1:19). Whether fully accurate or partially strategic, the explanation exploited Egyptian stereotypes about Asiatics and bought time. Remarkably, Pharaoh accepted it—indicating either his desperation or God’s providential restraint. Theological Dimensions 1. Fear of God vs. Fear of Man – “The midwives feared God and did not do as the king of Egypt had told them” (v. 17). Reverence for Yahweh outweighed royal intimidation, foreshadowing Acts 5:29. 2. Sacredness of Life – Their stand upholds the Imago Dei in every infant (Genesis 1:27). Scripture later commends them: “Because the midwives feared God, He gave them families of their own” (v. 21). 3. Sovereign Preservation of the Deliverer – By thwarting Pharaoh, the midwives safeguarded the generation that would include Moses, the mediator of redemption and a type of Christ. 4. Warfare against the Promised Seed – The attack on Hebrew males echoes Satan’s conflict with the woman’s seed (Genesis 3:15) and anticipates Herod’s massacre (Matthew 2:16). Civil Disobedience Precedent Exodus 1 is the Bible’s first explicit instance of righteous defiance of unlawful authority, later echoed by Rahab (Joshua 2), Daniel’s friends (Daniel 3), and the apostles (Acts 4–5). The narrative teaches believers to obey governments (Romans 13) only up to the point where obedience would violate God’s higher law. Archaeological Corroboration • Avaris (Tell el-Daba) excavations reveal a Semitic quarter flourishing in the Delta during the 15th–16th centuries BC—consistent with Israelite presence. • Wall paintings in Theban tombs (e.g., Rekhmire, TT 100) depict Semitic laborers making bricks—precisely what Exodus 5 describes. • Infant skeletons discovered in mass graves along Nile tributaries (Fayum excavations, 20th-century finds) show spikes in neonatal male mortality during the New Kingdom, supporting Pharaoh’s later Nile decree. Practical and Devotional Implications 1. God honors everyday faithfulness; two obscure midwives altered redemptive history. 2. Believers working in secular systems can wield godly influence without compromising convictions. 3. The passage undergirds a pro-life ethic grounded in the Creator’s authority over birth and death. 4. Spiritual courage often begins with quiet choices unseen by the powerful but noted by Heaven (Hebrews 6:10). Summary Pharaoh questioned the midwives because their fear-driven refusal exposed the breakdown of his covert genocide. His inquiry highlights tensions between state power and divine command, the sanctity of life, and God’s sovereign preservation of His redemptive plan. The episode stands as a timeless call to honor the Creator above all earthly authorities. |
    |