The Plagues of Egypt

Capt'n Midnight

Three darkness (sandstorm), hailstorms and Locusts are fairly easy to explain and are seasonal, maybe one day we could work back from ice cores or similar to the actual year of extreme climate events.

The other seven plagues (seven is a great number) can all be traced back to one event, an algae bloom. Could that also be climate related ?

Channel 4 had a documentary on this a while back (Equinox)
http://www.xyroth-enterprises.co.uk/10plague.htm

So the bible gets ++rep as a historical record but the events aren't beyond comprehension. Overall it's goes to show that if you dig deep enough you can explain most events.

Anyway:

The Isralites lived in a different area to the egyptians since they were building new cities for them
(sudan was in egypt then AFAIK) and had different eating habits.

1 / Blood - toxic algal bloom "Physteria" kills fish & turns water red

2 / Frogs - actually toads, no fish to eat the spawn, but they too were poisioned by algae and soon die. With no tadpoles/toads the lice and fly population can explode

3 / Lice - a midge "coolacoidees" which spreads blue tongue / african horse sickness

4 / Stable flies that carry the disease Glanders

5 / see 3 (Livestock die)

6 / see 4 (people get boils)

7 / hailstorms - wouldn't cover the whole country so Isrealites spared
(livestock die again)

8 / Locusts - hey' its Africa just lousy timing

9 / sandstorm - we're in Egypt not unheard of.

10 / this one is the most interesting

plague 10, the death of the first born was caused by the grain being harvested and stored when wet, and covered in locust droppings. The grain storage pits were then covered with sand which made them hot and humid, ideal for growing bacteria.

The identity of this bacteria was found when DR Edwardo Montagnia of the Atlanta Center for Disease Control was called in by Cleveland doctors to find out why children were dying. This cause was identified as "Stachybotrys atra", a black water loving mould that grows on cellulose and produces mycotoxins on it's spores, which causes heamoraging of the lungs.

This was the perfect agent to be the cause of the 10th plague, but was only effective in killing the first born due to a combination of cultural factors. Firstly, it only effected the top part of the grain store, and the important people got first servings. Then, Egyptian first born were given an extra helping of the best food, as culturally they were thought of as the most important thing that the family possessed. This resulted in only the first born Egyptians being given a lethal dose of the toxins.

At the same time, the israelites were using different practices for food preparation that didn't concentrate the infected grain into lethal doses. This resulted in no deaths among them.

ISAW

Further to that I briefly cought something on discovery or some such about the parting of the Red Sea. Geologists have dated an eruption in the med to around that time and suggest a tsunami might cause the Nile delta/estuary to empty with a sort of undertow before the wave struck.

Theres a just retired Geologist from Trinity I know who did a great public lecture series on biblical events and geological evidence for them e.g. the deluge.

Maybe the ISS should get this relaunched. I could have a chat with him.

Zombrex

AFAIK from a program on either Channel 4 or the BBC (could be the one mentioned in original post) the Bible doesn't say Moses parted the "Red" see, but the "Reed" sea, which was a marsh land in northern Egypt. A possible explination for the Bible description of Moses parting the sea and then drowning the army behind him is given by the massive volcanic explosion that happened around 2000 BC, that would have sent a wave that would have drowned most of the marsh and low lands of northen egypt. The volcanic explosion has also been given as a possible explination for the myth of Atlantis.

davros

I remember a very interesting British TV series called "Testament" about biblical archaeology. It was many years ago (I haven't been able to find a reference on the Internet) but one line has stuck with me since then. The presenter said that we can find archaeological evidence of two blokes who lit a campfire a few thousand years ago in the desert. But of a few hundred thousand Israelites who fled Egypt there is, mysteriously, nothing.

I think it's an exciting idea to take the Bible and try to explore it as a historical document. Correlating flood myths, for example, from different cultures is fascinating. But we can't assume that the stories are true at all to begin with.

I guess everyone has the bright idea at some stage to try and verify whether there is anything to religion by looking for historical or archaeological evidence that corroborates the Bible. I did anyway, and it just happened to be a week or two before "Testament" was shown (or reshown) on TV (aha, a sign!). But I was comprehensibly disabused of the notion. It's so tantalising - that era is just out of reach. We can't prove or disprove anything of significance. It truly is blind faith or nothing.