Am I wrong for thinking they made Ramses too sympathetic of a character...

Am I wrong for thinking they made Ramses too sympathetic of a character? God could've easily been seen as the villain of the film for all the punishment he dishes out on the Egyptians

Attached: prince-2.jpg (1278x720, 101K)

Yes. Slavery is wrong and Ramses response to being told so was “muh dad said I was weak gotta be stronk”

The movie was exactly the way they wanted it

Doesn't matter. He was still complict with slavery and didn't bother to let them go despite his people suffering.

Attached: 1WELP.png (540x281, 240K)

Everyone in this movie is arguable evil. Ramses is a slaver who loves having slaves so much that he’s willing to let his people suffer, and Team God’n’Moses kill innocent little kids.

On the other hand, the plagues song fucking SLAPS.

The original character of Rameses was even more sympathetic by today's standards. After the fifth plague (livestock dying) he was ready to free the isrealites, but god hardened his heart.

Even the nicest ones are capable of the worst type of treachery, that's real life for you.

But the suffering didn't just go to Ramses, but all of his subjects (who were guilty of not overthrowing their pharaoh and tolerating slavery in the first place I guess?)

God was a pretty hard-raging motherfucker until He became a father. Anyone that wasn't in His circle was a target. Then His son died and He was never the same.

They were thought to be Ramses' weak point. He's ruler over all these people, and if he continues to 'harden his heart' they will suffer.
Their suffering is all on him.
In theory.
The REAL problem is that, in the bible, it states that GOD is the one to harden his heart, not the pharoh himself. So basically, God made Ramses a dick so he could fuck over an entire nation.

That's basically "canon". God was blatantly dicking the Egyptians over just so he could jerk off about how much of a sadistic fuck he was.

Always remember that the moral of Exodus is "god will ruin your shit". If anything, Ramses was perfectly written, and so was Moses, because no matter how good you are or the love you bear for others, if you're not with Yahweh, he will fuck you more thoroughly than he fucked Jesus' mom.

That's why Moses' part of Plagues includes the line "And even now I wish that God had chose another / Serving as your foe on his behalf / Is the last thing that I wanted". Moses KNOWS this shit is fucked. But it's also God's will. Let his people go.

>this was literally to prevent future egyptians from giving children to the roman empire to get killed during the innocent's massacre

all according to keikaku

There's at least one part where the pharaoh went genuinely "ok, I give up'', and then rescinded his promise the moment he stopped feeling guilty.
So clearly he had free will at least some of the time, he just used it to be a dick.

I always thought that the part about God hardening the Pharaoh's heart was because the people of Egypt had let this happen and were supporting him, so the people of Egypt had to suffer for these crimes.

Like God was hardening his heart to see how long until the people of Egypt would tell the pharaoh to step off and let His people go.

That's ridiculous. Rulers aren't supposed to listen to their people. They're supposed to rule with their innate knowledge of Right. It's why God gave Moshe shit for allowing the hejews to build a golden calf. The idea of LISTENING to the people. Imagine.

Those are a bit of a translation error. Every plague actually words Pharaoh's heart becoming hard in a different way. When God asked Pharaoh to let His people go, Pharaoh's heart was hardened by the request made by God to submit to Him instead of relying on his own claim to divinity. This gets translated as God hardening Pharaoh's heart because all predicates in English are either passive or active (both of which indicate whether the subject of the sentence is acting upon the object of the sentence or vice versa), but Hebrew has a predicate form that is neutral and ambiguous (making it unclear whether the subject of the sentence is acting upon the object, or the other way around). It is not ambiguous when you read Exodus all the way through; the context of Exodus makes it clear which way it is meant, but picking that single verse out of context and having to translate it into English, a language without that verb tense, forces the translator into a position in which it can't be translated without a long translator's note like this post right here.

Okay now explain the Iron Chariot thing. I assume there's a line in the original Judges 1:19 which specifies that the LORD actually wasn't with Judah during the Iron Chariot thing.

It's pretty crazy how Dreamworks first movie was easily their best.

Are we playing the "clarify the entire Bible or you're a liar" game? Because that's pretty tedious and unfun. There was a question here that was relevant, so I gave my thoughts. I'd tell you to go to 8/christian/, but 8ch is kill, so just find somewhere that's actually meant to answer your gotcha questions.

No, I'm curious about the iron chariots bit because it's a pretty commonly cited* "omnipotence gotcha" and as a result I've always been curious about it

* by internet atheists

not him, but /his/ or Yea Forums is your best bet if your that interested in learning about that

I'm starting this before someone beats me to it.

SINCE YOU REFUSE TO FREE MY PEOPLE
ALL THROUGH THE LAND OF EGYPT

Yeah. God could have just appeared as a burning bush or something to Ramses, and told him to let the Hebrews go. Cut out the middle-man.

Ramses refused despite God casting fireballs on his kingdom, why would he have listened without a show of force?

Attached: f82312ef23eaf2473ddeeaad24b53dff.1000x563x1.jpg (1280x720, 69K)

So why didn't Rome get any plagues for wrecking Israel?

Because Rome had the Ancient jew district in the world.

Because they had sinned. In the Hebrew narrative, every time a foreign power comes and ruins their shit, they've sinned.