How can the 10th plague be explained scientifically?

Question

The 10 plagues of Egypt have been dismissed by many scientists as naturally occuring events that were attributed to God because the ancients didn't understand them. How can the plague regarding the death of all firstborn males in Egypt that did not have the blood of the sacrificial lamb on the door be explained naturally? In order for this to have happened naturally this force of nature would have had too:
1) Select only males
2) Select only males that are firstborn
3) Select only males that do not have the blood of the sacrificial lamb painted on their door

I forgot to mention that in Exodus 12:29 God struck down the firstborn of the livestock as well. This makes a natural account even more unlikely. Many have so far answered that it was a type of gas that killed firstborn Egyptian males. That because Egyptian firstborn males sat on the floor they were killed by gas. This explanation does not answer:
1)How firstborns in ALL of Egypt were struck, not just those living close to water
2) How this gas somehow only killed firstborn of livestock instead of ALL the livestock.

Answer 1

Harry, this can not be explained by science. But they will sure try.

Science will accept the most absurd and ridiculous natural explanation long before they can accept the obvious and clear biblical explanation.

I'm glad that you asked this question and I would love to hear from the atheists on this one.

Answer 2

There actually is a theory out there that makes more sense than God to me.

The lake they lived near could have expelled gases. This happens a lot. The gases are heavier than air, so they stay low to the ground. The one with the most privileges- the firstborn son- slept on a low bed. The other children slept on the rooftops or in the barns. The gas would have killed the firstborn sons.

Also, there was something about the Hebrews living in a different place than the Egyptians did, so they weren't near the lake.

In the end, I don't think it really matters whether science can prove this explaination or not. Religion can't PROVE the Bible's explanation either.

Answer 3

The firstborn son in the family would always get any available food before anyone else. In that year there was the result of all the other plagues--not enough grain, and also households would have been dirtier than usual. Jewish households were swept clean each Friday in preparation for the Sabbath and therefore would have been cleaner than those of others. So, Jewish boys would have been less likely to be sick during this period, and firstborn sons of Egyptians would have all eaten grain that was probably moldy. Those are some speculations but we just don't know.

Answer 4

Well, the first problem with your argument is the simple fact that it requires believing that the biblical account is completley historically accurate. That in and of itself is open to a world of debate.
However, yes it was traditional for the first born males to sleep closest to the floor (for various cultural reasons I forget). Ergo, the toxic fumes would have killed primarily them.
Of course, one can also condsider this...
God created the laws of nature, and may have well done his will using these laws. In other words, just because it may have a scientific explanation, doesn't mean it isn't still the work of God.

Answer 5

I heard a theory that in those days the first born son slept on the first floor while the rest of the family slept in the loft. It would then be possible for the first born to die of some gas.

I don't believe this, just a theory some Atheist put out.

Answer 6

confident, definitely. purchase or lease out of your library Isaac Asimov's "Asimov's instruction manual to the Bible". that isn't the main "medical" e book, it bargains greater with historic previous and historic documents, in spite of the shown fact that it is relatively in intensity. working example, concerning the flood he talks approximately how Egypt replaced into flourishing on the time so a international flood replaced into impossible. extremely, he hypothesizes that an area flood in Sumeria (which replaced into flat land located between 2 rivers) is greater probable. In 1872 an archeologist got here upon maintains to be on pills from an historical Assyrian library that talk of a guy who escaped a flood on a ship along with his kinfolk and a pattern of animals, and this tale dates even extra back to the Sumerian tale of Gilgamesh. the story says "international flood" however the belief of international on the time replaced into very limited...Himalayan mountains working example have been impassable, and little of the international have been explored at this element. quite a few techniques, this e book is particularly a stable examine in case you like analytical diagnosis.

Answer 7

All of the plagues were done by advanced scientific acts by God that mankind's still primitive scientific knowledge hasn't advanced far enough yet to explain.

Answer 8

Well, we'd first need to establish that this actually happened. There are no Egyptian records of this incident, which you'd think would be significant enough to warrant a lot of such mentions.

Answer 9

God allowed this to represent the covering of his blood over sin. It is a miracle of God, nothing else.

Answer 10

That's a silly way to think about it. I don't believe the fables of the bible, so why would I want to try to disprove or explain it scientifically?
How can you prove that any of the plagues ever even occurred? The Bible?