Uncommon History

In line with the years of intentional re-writing of history for political gain, one event that has been under relentless attack in recent years is the biblical account of the Hebrew exodus from Egypt. In fact, a recent program on the history channel attempted to dismiss all of the plagues accounted in the book of Exodus. For explanation purposes, the following is the list of plagues:

Plague of Blood – Ex. 7:14–25

Plague of Frogs – Ex. 7:25–8:11

Plague of Lice – Ex. 8:16–19

Plague of Flies – Ex. 8:20–32

Plague of Livestock Death – Ex. 9:1–7

Plague of Boils – Ex. 9:8–12

Plague of Hail – Ex. 9:13–35

Plague of Locusts – Ex. 10:1–20

Plague of Darkness – Ex. 10:21–29

Death of the Firstborn – Ex. 11:1–12:36

When it comes to the subject of Biblical history, deterring from biblical text should only be done if the biblical text is referred to as the measuring rule of other proofs. This may seem like circular reasoning, but really, if you are trying to prove a hypothesis, the hypothesis itself becomes the measure. Similarly though, especially in the realm of historic research, multiple primary sources are necessary as “witnesses” to an event.

When it comes to the exodus account and the biblical plagues, there is another primary source document that relates events in Egypt that very much resemble the accounts in the book of Exodus.

One such text is known by historian circles as the “Ipuwer papyrus.” Within this narrative, there is a description of the following:

“Plague is throughout the land, blood is everywhere — the river is blood … and the hail smote every herd of the field … the land is without light and there is a thick darkness throughout the land … the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt — from the firstborn of Pharoah that sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the prison…”

Source: “Passover proof lies in Egyptian hieroglyphs“

While this text alone is not conclusive proof of the biblical account due to various disagreements relating to the age of the text, it would seem most plausible to line the two accounts side-by-side. While this is encouraging information to the believer, it does not override belief through faith.