Concept

Plagues of Egypt

Intro

The ten plagues are the series of judgments God sent on Egypt in Exodus 7 to Exodus 12, when Pharaoh refused to let Israel go. The water of the Nile turned to blood, then came frogs, gnats, flies, the death of livestock, boils, hail, locusts, three days of darkness, and finally the death of the firstborn on the night of the first Passover.

The Bible does not present the plagues as random disasters. It presents them as a contest. God says plainly that he is judging "all the gods of Egypt" (Exodus 12:12), and the plagues hit the very things Egypt worshipped or trusted: the river, the land's fertility, the sun, and Pharaoh himself, who was treated as divine. The point, repeated again and again, is that both Egypt and Israel would "know that I am Jehovah."

Three questions come up most often. Did God unfairly force Pharaoh to refuse? (The text says Pharaoh hardened his own heart several times before God is said to harden it.) Was killing the firstborn just? (That question has its own pages, linked below.) And did any of this really happen? Some try to explain the plagues through a natural chain of events, and an old Egyptian poem called the Ipuwer papyrus is sometimes offered as an Egyptian record of them, though it is an older lament in a stock genre and most scholars do not accept the claim. This page treats each question fairly.

◎ See this page's graph and discover linked topics →

In full

The plague narrative (Exodus 7 to Exodus 12) is a covenantal-judicial sequence: ten escalating signs and judgments, framed by an announced purpose (Exodus 7:5), a theological interpretation (Exodus 12:12; Numbers 33:4), and a liturgical memorial (the Passover, Exodus 12:1-13). Four lines of discussion cluster around it. The first is the polemic against Egypt's gods, which the text itself asserts and which Egyptologically informed commentators such as John Currid have developed plague by plague. The second is the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, where the text alternates between Pharaoh hardening his own heart, a passive or stative description, and God hardening it; the full philosophical treatment lives at Hardening Pharaohs Heart and Hardening Pharaohs Heart Objection Defeater. The third is the tenth plague and the Passover, where the moral objection about the Egyptian firstborn is handled at God and the Killing of Children and the substitutionary logic at Substitutionary Principle in the OT. The fourth is historicity: naturalistic chain-reaction theories, the Ipuwer papyrus, and the dating debate, with the archaeological objection answered at No Archaeological Proof of the Exodus Objection Defeater.

The ten plagues at a glance

Two structural features are worth noticing. The magicians keep pace for two plagues and then concede at the third:

18. And the magicians did so with their enchantments to bring forth lice, but they could not: and there were lice upon man, and upon beast. 19. Then the magicians said unto Pharaoh, This is the finger of God: and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he hearkened not unto them; as Jehovah had spoken. (Exodus 8:18-19, ASV)

And from the fourth plague onward the text marks a distinction between Egypt and Israel, so the plagues read as targeted judgments, not as indiscriminate natural disasters:

22. And I will set apart in that day the land of Goshen, in which my people dwell, that no swarms of flies shall be there; to the end thou mayest know that I am Jehovah in the midst of the earth. (Exodus 8:22, ASV)

The seventh plague also adds a note of mercy within judgment. Egyptians who believed the warning could shelter their servants and cattle, and some did (Exodus 9:20-21). The plagues were survivable for anyone who took God at his word, which anticipates the Passover.

The polemic against Egypt's gods

The text names its own theme. Before the tenth plague God says:

12. For I will go through the land of Egypt in that night, and will smite all the first-born in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am Jehovah. (Exodus 12:12, ASV)

The itinerary of Numbers 33, looking back, repeats the point:

4. while the Egyptians were burying all their first-born, whom Jehovah had smitten among them: upon their gods also Jehovah executed judgments. (Numbers 33:4, ASV)

And Jethro, Moses' Midianite father-in-law, draws the same conclusion when he hears the story:

11. Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all gods; yea, in the thing wherein they dealt proudly against them. (Exodus 18:11, ASV)

How far the plague-by-plague mapping goes. John Currid (Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament, Baker, 1997) is the standard evangelical treatment of the plagues as polemic against the Egyptian pantheon. In the reading he and others develop, the Nile turned to blood strikes at Hapi, the god of the Nile flood; the frogs mock Heqet, a frog-headed goddess associated with fertility and childbirth; the darkness strikes at Re, the sun god at the center of Egyptian religion; and the death of Pharaoh's own firstborn strikes at the king, who was regarded as divine and as the guarantor of cosmic order. Richard Hess, reviewing Currid, also notes his argument that the plagues reverse the creation account of Genesis 1, throwing Egypt back toward chaos.

Two cautions keep this honest:

• The text states the general point, not the mapping. Exodus 12:12 and Numbers 33:4 say God judged Egypt's gods; they do not assign each plague to a named deity. The tight one-plague-one-god charts found in popular teaching go beyond the text, and some pairings (for example, flies or gnats with particular gods) are much weaker than others.
• The strongest pairings are the obvious ones. The Nile, the sun and the divine king were unmistakably central to Egyptian religion and state ideology. A God who turns the river to blood, switches off the sun for three days and takes the heir from the throne is plainly judging what Egypt trusted, whether or not every lesser plague has a target.

The theme carries forward into Israel's worship. The Song of the Sea asks, "Who is like unto thee, O Jehovah, among the gods?" (Exodus 15:11, ASV), and Joshua later tells Israel to put away "the gods which your fathers served beyond the River, and in Egypt" (Joshua 24:14, ASV). For how the codex handles the language of "gods" in such texts, see OT Polytheism Objection and Elohim Is a Divine Council Objection Defeater.

The hardening of Pharaoh's heart

The narrative uses three kinds of statement about Pharaoh's heart, and they are not evenly spread. Read in the ASV:

1. God announces in advance that he will harden Pharaoh's heart

• Exodus 4:21: "but I will harden his heart, and he will not let the people go."
• Exodus 7:3: "And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt."

2. Pharaoh hardens his own heart (Pharaoh is the subject)

• Exodus 8:15, after the frogs: "But when Pharaoh saw that there was respite, he hardened his heart."
• Exodus 8:32, after the flies: "And Pharaoh hardened his heart this time also."
• Exodus 9:34, after the hail: "he sinned yet more, and hardened his heart, he and his servants."

3. Pharaoh's heart "was hardened" or "is stubborn" (no agent named)

• Exodus 7:13, 7:14, 7:22, 8:19, 9:7, 9:35

4. God hardens Pharaoh's heart (God is the subject)

• Exodus 9:12, after the boils: "And Jehovah hardened the heart of Pharaoh."
• Exodus 10:1, 10:20, 10:27, 11:10
• At the sea: Exodus 14:4, 14:8

What the distribution shows. Through the first five plagues, the narrator never says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. The heart is described as hardened or stubborn, and twice Pharaoh is said to harden it himself, the first time explicitly because he saw "respite." The first narrated act of God hardening Pharaoh comes at the sixth plague (Exodus 9:12), and from then on divine hardening dominates, although Pharaoh is still said to harden his own heart after the hail (Exodus 9:34). The pattern is the one Augustine stated: Pharaoh's free will is not removed by the divine statements, because Scripture also says Pharaoh hardened his own heart, "Thus it was that both God hardened him by His just judgment, and Pharaoh by his own free will" (Augustine, On Grace and Free Will, NPNF1 vol. 5, PDF p. 376).

What it does not settle. The advance announcements (Exodus 4:21; 7:3) come before any refusal, and Paul uses the episode in Romans 9:17-18, quoting Exodus 9:16, to speak of God's freedom in mercy and hardening. Calvinist, Arminian, Molinist and Open Theist readers weigh those texts differently. The four positions, their costs and their defenders are laid out at Hardening Pharaohs Heart, and the debate version at Hardening Pharaohs Heart Objection Defeater. What every one of those readings shares is that Pharaoh is not portrayed as an unwilling puppet: he is a king who kept choosing defiance whenever the pressure lifted.

The tenth plague and the Passover

The final plague was announced at the very start of Moses' mission, and it is framed as measure for measure:

22. And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith Jehovah, Israel is my son, my first-born: 23. and I have said unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me; and thou hast refused to let him go: behold, I will slay thy son, thy first-born. (Exodus 4:22-23, ASV)

The background matters. The oppression of Israel had included a royal decree to drown every Hebrew boy in the Nile:

22. And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive. (Exodus 1:22, ASV)

The judgment fell at midnight:

29. And it came to pass at midnight, that Jehovah smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt, from the first-born of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the first-born of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the first-born of cattle. 30. And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead. (Exodus 12:29-30, ASV)

The Passover was the way of escape, and it was not limited to ethnic Israel. Every household that put the lamb's blood on its doorposts was passed over:

13. And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and there shall no plague be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt. (Exodus 12:13, ASV)

A "mixed multitude" left Egypt with Israel (Exodus 12:38), and the Passover law provides for the sojourning stranger to keep it on the same terms as the native-born (Exodus 12:48-49). Israel's own firstborn were spared by substitution, not by merit, which is why the firstborn were afterwards redeemed (Exodus 13:13-15). The New Testament reads the whole event christologically: "For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ" (1 Corinthians 5:7, ASV); see Substitutionary Principle in the OT and Typological Fulfillment.

The moral objection. The death of Egyptian children is the sharpest part of the narrative, and the codex does not dodge it. The full responses, including the creator's prerogative over life, the judicial context of a state that had drowned Israel's sons, the offered way of escape, and the Christian hope for children who die, are developed at God and the Killing of Children (which treats the Egyptian firstborn as its first text-type), in Premise 5 of Hardening Pharaohs Heart Objection Defeater, and in the wider framework of Divine Wipeouts and Their Justification. On how the Old Testament values children in general, see Children in OT Theology.

Naturalistic explanations

Several scholars and scientists have tried to explain the plagues as a natural cascade. They deserve a fair hearing, partly because some believers welcome them as showing that God worked through natural means, and some skeptics use them to show the story needs no God.

The ecological chain (Greta Hort, 1957 and 1958). Writing in Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, Hort proposed that a single, unusually severe Nile flood set off a chain: red-colored organisms and sediment turned the river red and killed the fish; the polluted river drove the frogs ashore, where they died; the dead frogs bred insects; and disease spread to livestock and then to people as boils. Hail, locusts and darkness (a dust or silt storm) followed from the season's weather.

The epidemiological reading (John Marr and Curtis Malloy, 1996). In "An Epidemiologic Analysis of the Ten Plagues of Egypt" (Caduceus 12, no. 1, Spring 1996), the authors offered a disease-and-insect chain, starting from a toxic algal bloom and running through insect-borne livestock diseases and a bacterial skin disease. For the tenth plague they proposed mold toxins in stored grain, which would hit those who ate first.

The volcanic chain (Siro Trevisanato). Trevisanato, a microbiologist, argued in The Plagues of Egypt: Archaeology, History and Science Look at the Bible that fallout from the eruption of Thera (Santorini) in the Aegean, which he dates to the seventeenth century BC, could account for the first plagues: ash and chemical contamination reddening water, acid rain causing skin injuries, disturbed weather, and darkness from ash clouds.

Climate and algae (Augusto Mangini and Stephan Pflugmacher, 2010). A paleoclimatologist and a biologist proposed that drought slowed the Nile and allowed a red toxic algal bloom, which would begin a similar cascade.

The limits of these theories:

1. They cannot explain the tenth plague as the text describes it. The narrative's last plague kills exactly the firstborn, of man and beast, in every Egyptian house, at midnight on an announced night, while sparing every house marked with blood (Exodus 11:5; 12:29-30). The grain-toxin proposal has to invent a custom of firstborn-first eating that the text does not mention, and it cannot explain the blood on the doorposts or the timing.
2. They cannot explain the distinctions. The text repeatedly says the flies, the livestock disease, the hail and the darkness spared Goshen (Exodus 8:22; 9:4, 26; 10:23). A regional ecological cascade would not respect the border of the land where Israel lived.
3. They cannot explain the timing. Each plague is announced and begins or ends at Moses' word. A natural chain explains, at most, the raw materials of the plagues, not their announcement, sequence and cessation on demand.
4. The science of the chains is contested. Critics of Hort's proposal point out that the organisms she cited are freshwater algae of cold, still water rather than a flowing tropical river, and that the disease steps she proposed do not work as described. The Thera theory depends on an eruption date in the seventeenth century BC, more than a century before even the early Exodus date, and on Egypt receiving heavy fallout from an eruption hundreds of miles to the north-west.
5. They undercut the skeptical use they are put to. If a naturalistic chain fits the plagues well, the plague narrative preserves a memory of real Egyptian conditions, which is the opposite of the claim that the Exodus is pure fiction.

A theological footnote. The Bible itself sometimes describes God using natural means, as with the east wind that brought the locusts (Exodus 10:13) and the wind at the sea (Exodus 14:21). A Christian does not need to deny that natural processes were involved in some plagues. What the text insists on is the meaning of the sequence: announced, targeted, timed and ended by the God of Israel, so that Egypt would know that he is Jehovah.

The Ipuwer papyrus

The claim. The Admonitions of Ipuwer contains lines describing the river as blood, disorder throughout the land, servants becoming rich, and widespread death. Some writers have argued it is an Egyptian eyewitness account of the plagues. The identification was made famous by Immanuel Velikovsky in Ages in Chaos (Doubleday, 1952), who treated the papyrus as an Egyptian account of the Exodus and lowered Egyptian chronology by several centuries to make the two line up. Some Christian apologetics books still use it: Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman's 20 Compelling Evidences That God Exists (2002) presents the Ipuwer text as describing events consistent with the plagues (PDF pp. 62-63).

Why most scholars do not treat it as a record of the Exodus:

1. Its date. The text survives on Papyrus Leiden I 344 recto, a copy from the Nineteenth Dynasty, but the composition itself is generally dated to the Middle Kingdom or earlier, well before any date proposed for the Exodus.
2. Its genre. It belongs to a recognized body of Egyptian lament literature that describes a world turned upside down in stock images. "The river is blood" in that setting reads as poetic imagery for chaos, not a report of a specific event.
3. Its content. It names no Israelites, no Moses, no plague sequence and no departure of slaves. It even speaks of foreigners coming into Egypt rather than leaving.
4. Its chief advocate. Velikovsky's revised chronology is rejected by Egyptologists, so the synchronism built on it does not stand.

The scholarly consensus is that the papyrus fits within Middle Kingdom lament literature and is unrelated to the Exodus. The codex sets it aside for the same reason the No Archaeological Proof of the Exodus Objection Defeater does: claiming weak evidence costs more credibility than it gains. The absence of an Egyptian plague record is explained by Egyptian record-keeping, which did not memorialize national humiliations, and by the poor preservation of Delta sites.

Historicity and dating, briefly

Three positions frame the discussion:

• Early date (about 1446 BC). Based on 1 Kings 6:1 (see 1 Kings 6), which places the start of Solomon's temple "in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt" (ASV), together with Judges 11:26. Defended by Bryant Wood ("The Biblical Date for the Exodus Is 1446 BC: A Response to James Hoffmeier," JETS 50/2, 2007).
• Late date (thirteenth century BC). Based on the store city "Raamses" (Exodus 1:11), identified with Pi-Ramesses, the Delta capital built under Ramesses II. Defended by Kenneth Kitchen, who places the Exodus around 1260 BC (On the Reliability of the Old Testament, 2003), and by James Hoffmeier ("What Is the Biblical Date for the Exodus?" JETS 50/2, 2007), who reads the 480 years as a symbolic or aggregate figure.
• Minimalist. No exodus event, or only a small kernel heavily elaborated later (Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, The Bible Unearthed, 2001).

The archaeological case is answered at No Archaeological Proof of the Exodus Objection Defeater, with Moses Did Not Exist Objection Defeater on Moses and Israel Emerged From Within Canaan Objection Defeater and the Merneptah Stele on Israel's presence in Canaan by about 1208 BC. Both the early and late dates are held by scholars who accept the Exodus as historical; the dating debate is a disagreement about when, not whether.

See also

• Old Testament Difficult Texts, parent cluster
• Hardening Pharaohs Heart, the four Christian readings of the hardening texts
• Hardening Pharaohs Heart Objection Defeater, debate-prep version, including the firstborn premise
• God and the Killing of Children, the moral objection to the tenth plague
• Children in OT Theology, how the Old Testament values children
• Substitutionary Principle in the OT, the Passover lamb and the redemption of the firstborn
• Divine Wipeouts and Their Justification, the wider pattern of divine judgment narratives
• No Archaeological Proof of the Exodus Objection Defeater, historicity, scale and the Ipuwer question
• Moses Did Not Exist Objection Defeater, the historicity of Moses
• Israel Emerged From Within Canaan Objection Defeater, the settlement model
• Merneptah Stele, earliest Egyptian mention of Israel
• Biblical Archaeology, wider archaeological context
• Moses, the mediator of the plagues
• Exodus, book hub