How can Exodus 9:6 say all Egyptian livestock died, yet later verses still refer to surviving livestock? 1. The Context of the Plagues in Exodus Exodus 9, in the Berean Standard Bible, details a series of divine judgments on Egypt known as the plagues. These events build upon each other, highlighting both the righteousness of the Almighty and the stubborn resistance of Pharaoh. By the time we reach the plague involving Egyptian livestock (Exodus 9:1–7), a clear contest emerges between Pharaoh’s hardened heart and the command of the Almighty to let the Israelites go. The question arises from Exodus 9:6: “And the next day the LORD did this, and all the livestock of the Egyptians died, but not one animal belonging to the Israelites died.” Later verses, however, speak of surviving Egyptian livestock (for example, Exodus 9:19–25 references cattle still in the fields). This apparent discrepancy has prompted discussion on how “all the livestock” could perish if some are mentioned afterward. Below is a comprehensive examination of this issue, taking into account the biblical text, ancient language usage, relevant cultural context, and other scholarly observations. 2. The Immediate Textual Issue Exodus 9:6 states: “Then the LORD did this the next day, and all the livestock of the Egyptians died, but not one animal belonging to the Israelites died.” Yet in Exodus 9:19, Moses warns: “Now, therefore, order your livestock and whatever you have in the field to be brought to shelter. Every man and beast that remains in the field and is not brought in will die when the hail falls upon them.’” If “all the livestock” truly had been wiped out earlier, why would there be a need to shelter remaining Egyptian livestock? Readers understandably seek resolution to this seeming contradiction. 3. Considering the Ancient Hebrew Use of “All” (“Kol”) In many Semitic languages, including Hebrew, the term “all” (Hebrew: כֹּל / kol) often carries a sense of totality but can also be used in a more flexible sense—such as “all kinds,” “all within a certain locale,” “the entire group under consideration,” or “every relevant member.” Similar usage appears elsewhere in Scripture when sweeping phrases are employed, yet other contexts show exceptions. For example, Genesis 41:57 notes “all the earth” came to Egypt during the famine, not meaning every person on the planet, but rather a vast array of people from surrounding regions. Thus, “all the livestock of the Egyptians died” may not necessarily mean that literally every single Egyptian-owned animal ceased to exist throughout Egypt, but rather that all subject to the plague at that time perished—likely those exposed in the field, matching the precise wording of Exodus 9:3: “…the hand of the LORD will be on your livestock in the field…” 4. Understanding the Scope of the Plague It is crucial to note the plague’s scope: • Exodus 9:3 clarifies that the plague would be “on your livestock in the field—on your horses, donkeys, camels, herds, and flocks.” • The language strongly suggests that livestock located outdoors were affected. There may well have been animals secured in barns or sheltered areas, animals that had not yet succumbed, or animals not in the impact zone of this particular judgment. Moreover, regions of Egypt were experienced in storing grain and possibly sheltering valuable animals. Some livestock might have been moved or sold after the plague but before the subsequent hail. The text does not require a universal, absolute extermination of every animal but instead describes devastating mass loss among those affected. 5. Plausible Explanations Harmonizing the Text 5.1 “All” Describing All in the Plague’s Path A consistent explanation is that “all the livestock” in the path of the plague died. Exodus 9:3 and 9:6 reference animals “in the field,” while animals kept indoors or procured afterward would remain alive. 5.2 Acquisition or Redistribution of Livestock Another view suggests that, after the plague, Egyptians could have purchased, borrowed, or otherwise gathered surviving animals from neighboring regions or from the Israelites, allowing some Egyptians to replenish their herds before the hailstorm. 5.3 Linguistic Hyperbole Although not mere “exaggeration,” biblical writers often use comprehensive terms in powerful ways. When Scripture states “the entire city came out” or “all the country,” it frequently highlights a large-scale response. In the same manner, Exodus 9:6 emphasizes the extensive devastation of that particular plague without necessarily implying there was not a single surviving animal in the entire land. 6. Archaeological and Historical Observations While direct, universally agreed-upon Egyptian records of the plagues are scant, some historians and Egyptologists point to documents such as the Ipuwer Papyrus (albeit debated in dating and interpretation), which describes catastrophic events and upheavals that some scholars correlate with conditions akin to biblical plagues. Additionally, archaeological evidence of Egyptian civilization reveals complex agricultural and livestock management practices. Important animals may have been sheltered or isolated, especially during climatic or geopolitical crises. Such practices would align with the notion that some livestock could have survived or been replaced quickly from reserves or neighboring peoples. 7. The Consistency of Scriptural Accounts From a manuscript perspective, large-scale die-offs followed by references to surviving animals are not contradictory when properly understood. Ancient readers of the Exodus account likely would not have been troubled by this language, given the typical Hebrew usage of “all” and the recognized reality that plagues could localize in phases. Exodus 9 as a whole communicates a mighty demonstration of judgment on Pharaoh’s oppression, yet also highlights Israel’s divine protection. Taken within the broader context of the plagues, it underscores the repeated attempts by God to humble Pharaoh and reveal sovereign power rather than being merely a report of each animal’s fate, nationwide, in absolute terms. 8. Theological and Practical Reflections The main theological emphasis in Exodus is not the statistical count of every animal but the demonstration of authority over creation—even over the so-called gods of Egypt. The devastation of livestock served as a consequence of Pharaoh’s rejection of divine authority and stood as a stark sign of judgment. Believers and seekers alike can glean an important lesson: biblical passages must be weighed in context, considering language, culture, and the overarching narrative. This principle helps resolve apparent tensions, reinforcing confidence in the Scriptures’ unity and historical consistency. 9. Conclusion When Exodus 9:6 says “all the livestock of the Egyptians died,” it refers specifically to those exposed to the plague, effectively decimating livestock in the field. Subsequent verses that mention surviving or remaining livestock do not contradict this but rather disclose that some animals remained protected or were obtained elsewhere. Scholars note the use of “all” in Hebrew can function to describe a total loss within a specific context rather than a universal, absolute statement. This careful reading of Scripture, supported by linguistic, historical, and archaeological considerations, safeguards our understanding of the integrity of Exodus. Far from undermining the reasonableness of the biblical account, the narrative highlights the purposeful judgments on Egypt, the unique preservation of the Israelites, and the consistency of Scripture when interpreted coherently. |
    |