Scientific look at the plagues

DR. EUGENE KAELLIS SPECIAL TO THE JEWISH BULLETIN

Determining the distinction between appearance and reality is the very bedrock of science. What we call reality, however, is conditioned by our means of perception and the conceptual framework in which we make sense of our observations. And both of these change over time. For example, although microorganisms were all around us, until the invention of the microscope no one could see them, and although gravitational phenomena have always been a property of earth, until Galileo and Newton, we did not have the framework in which to place observations, such as the falling of bodies. It is, therefore, unrealistic to expect biblical writings such as the Book of Exodus to apprehend the world as we now do.

The story of Exodus reveals the framework in which the Israelites placed their observations of natural and social phenomena, all of which were considered as motivated by the will of God on behalf of their struggle for liberation from slavery.

A noteworthy feature of the story is the repeated vacillations of Pharaoh. One day he would promise to set the Israelites free, the next day rescinding his promise. It is almost certain that, as a weak-minded ruler, he was easily swayed by the leading members of two contending factions. On the one hand was the priestly class that saw the Israelites as religious subversives. On the other hand were the building contractors, who enjoyed the benefit of the cheap labor supplied by Hebrew slaves, and the top military officers, who feared that the emancipated Israelites would form a military alliance with Egypt's enemies and attack Egypt.
But it is the history of the plagues that is most intriguing.

The first plague, the turning of the Nile to "blood" can be explained by reference to protosiphonaceae (a single-celled water plant or alga) that periodically bloomed in the shallow, sun-warmed portions of the river and which produces a bright red pigment. Most tadpoles, that appeared in great numbers after the frog breeding season, because of the limited nutrients available, would never have metamorphosed into frogs were it not for the algal bloom that provided ample nourishment, hence the second plague, that of frogs. But most of the frogs died because the environment could not sustain their great numbers.

Dead frogs are a perfect place for insect eggs to develop into larvae and then flies or gnats. Hence, the third and fourth plagues. Flying insects are ideal vectors for contagion, hence the fifth plague, the disease and death of cattle. The sixth plague, that of boils, could also have resulted from the flies carrying bacteria, probably staphylococci, from the dead cattle (or frogs) to people. That ends the environmental cycle that began with the algal bloom.

The seventh plague, hail, could simply have been a rare but occasional meteorological phenomenon. In the Ancient World, Egypt was prominent in grain farming. With so much grain (probably barley) flattened by the hail, it is not surprising that locusts appeared in very large numbers (eighth plague).

Three days of darkness (ninth plague) was probably a result of a volcanic explosion, which loaded the air with lava particles. Exodus later describes how the Israelites were guided in their journey by "a pillar of cloud" and "a pillar of fire," possible references to volcanic activity in the area. Volcanic and seismic phenomena (described Psalm 114 and Amos 1.1, as well as more recent history) were common in areas east and north of Lower Egypt. When Krakatoa (in the East Indies) exploded in 1883, a band of dense volcanic ash was carried by the wind as far as southern Africa.

Exodus describes the plagues as exempting the Israelites and their cattle from diseases that befell the Egyptians and their animals. Scholars have attempted ingenious naturalistic explanations for this discrepancy. Most likely, the narration simply exaggerates the suffering of the Egyptians and dismisses or ignores the effect of the plagues on the Israelites. This is not unique to Exodus. Numbers is, as are other scriptures, written, of course, from an Israelo-centric point of view.

The 10th, and last, plague, the death of the Egyptian firstborn, is the most problematic from a scientific point of view. It is difficult to believe that somehow the children of the Israelites would have been spared in such a lethal contagion, if indeed, contagion it was. And why only the firstborn? The Israelites were exempted from visitations of the Angel of Death purportedly by painting the blood of a lamb on their doorposts or lintels.

The most logical and rational explanation, in a naturalistic methodology, is that this plague describes the results of selective violence by Hebrew partisans of liberation. But, if Pharaoh's firstborn was among the victims, it is not difficult to imagine that palace intrigue, as a result of the previously mentioned factional differences, permitted entry into the royal household whereby the Pharaoh's son was killed. Especially today, when Israel is being subjected to terror, it is hard to accept the probability that the death of the Egyptian firstborn was the work of Israelites intent on finally forcing the Pharaoh's hand.

Violence then, and unfortunately today, was and remains an instrument for attaining objectives that, in the belief of its perpetrators, cannot be otherwise attained. In the post-Second World War period, warfare, while evidently ongoing, is now looked upon as a chronic aberration, if that is not an oxymoron; it is no longer held up as a natural consequence, or even, in the opinion of some, a desirable part, of the human condition.

Moreover, while violence can be decried, given the nature of the world, it is often necessary in self-defence, including survival and justifiable aims. Judeans successfully revolted against the alien forces of Antiochus Epiphanes and twice fought the Romans in defeated efforts to regain their independence.

This all devolves to the distinction between violence that is justified by self-defence and violence that is prompted by hatred.

An attempt to interpret Scripture by applying naturalistic, social-historical explanations is bound to be upsetting to some. However, in a world that now hews its understanding by the use of logic, science, data and critical historiography, clinging to traditional exegeses is unacceptable for many people. As well, to do so is to strengthen a method that has been used frequently against the Jews – the dissemination of The Passion of the Christ, for example, which relies on a Gospel that cannot be taken literally without impugning the Jews and perpetuating harmful distortions of Christian history.

These interpretations of the plagues reveal the essence of most miracles. They are not necessarily unnatural events that occur beyond the bounds of scientific explanation. A miracle is a meaningful event and the miracle of the plagues exists not in the phenomena but in the advantage taken of them by a small, enslaved people who thereby achieved their freedom.

Dr. Eugene Kaellis is a retired academic living in New Westminster.

^TOP