If choosing to consider that the plagues of Egypt indeed happened through natural disaster, then why is it that only the Egyptians seem to suffer from everything when the Israelites and their families all live in Egypt with the Egyptians at that time?
Natural disasters affect everyone and if there is anyone who is most likely to die in times of natural crisis, it would be the poor Israelites. Moreover, the death of the first born is the most important part of the 10 plagues and yet scientific and naturalistic theories all lack significant explanation and no evidence at all to support their claim.
We have learned before that Egyptian society is built on Primogeniture principle where the first-born of every family is the most important. The Pharaoh for instance, is always the first born of the first born of the first born.
That is how they continued this hierarchy in ancient Egypt. With the death of every first born, the entire Egyptian civilization crumbled. Now, the question is, if the death of the first born was caused by eating the poisoned grain, then what about the others?
Surely the other siblings would have followed suit after the first-borns had their fill.
Why didn’t they die? Why only the first-borns? And how did the Israelites escape such an ordeal? Surely, the Israelites would have lost their first-borns as well, or worse they would have lost more of their family members?
Dr. Robert Miller who is an associate professor from the Catholic University of America believed that the problem with naturalistic explanations is that they fail to consider the entirety of the phenomena.
The whole point of the Exodus story is that the Israelites were freed from Egypt not by natural causes (because surely the Egyptians would have had more reasons to hold on to their slaves in times of natural disasters than let them go) but by the hands of God.
