It’s Only Natural?

Dear AiG,

I was reading an article that made the claim that according to the ancient historian Flavius Josephus, during the Plagues in Egypt, the Israelites supposedly dumped “toxic red rock” (as they put it), possibly containing mercury, into the Nile, poisoning the irrigation waters, and thus it wasn’t really a miracle of God.

I tried to research this claim about Josephus saying this, but I can’t find it. I was wondering if Josephus really said this and was hoping you provide a refutation of this.

Thanks,
—D.O., U.S.

Thank you for contacting Answers in Genesis. First of all, Josephus, a Jewish historian, said no such thing. He did say:

“. . . but he who obliged the Nile to run bloody for your sakes, and tamed the haughtiness of the Egyptians by various sorts of judgments. . . .”1

“For the Egyptian river ran with bloody water at the command of God, insomuch that it was undrinkable, and they had no other spring of water either; for the water was not only of the colour of blood, but it brought upon those who ventured to drink of it, great pains and bitter torment. Such was the river to the Egyptians; but it was sweet and fit for drinking to the Hebrews, and in no way different from what it naturally used to be.”2

Sadly, in today’s culture, people use any possible means to attack the veracity of the Word of God—whether it relates to creation or miracles or historical events. So, we need to carefully check such claims. In this instance, it was fairly easy to search Josephus and see what he said (I used the Online Bible software, which includes the writings of Josephus).

One of the most significant, modern, naturalistic explanations of the plagues of Egypt was that of Greta Hort in the late 1950s.3 She argued that a specific species of red algae, as well as a large amount of red dirt, had washed into the Nile upriver.

This supposedly set in place a chain reaction that killed the fish, introduced the anthrax bacteria, caused frogs to evacuate the river, and so on. Such an event also supposedly coincided with a few other alleged natural events, such as hail and thunder and a desert sandstorm. This, Hort argued, would account for all ten plagues. But the red algae, red dirt, and other explanations by Hort failed on several accounts.4 Brad Sparks responds to Hort’s claims with a number of counterpoints, including these:

1. This was the wrong season for these things to happen.
2. Silt should be brown, not red.
3. The algae claimed by Hort does not exist in the Nile.
4. The algae purported to cause the damage is non-toxic and non-polluting.

So, the claims of red algae fall significantly short. Interestingly, Hort herself rejects dirt-only models, as they simply cannot get the water “red enough.” This is why Hort resorted to appealing to red algae in the first place. Hort’s “natural explanation” also fails to account for Josephus’s reference to the water being toxic only for the Egyptions but fit to drink for the Jews (Exodus 7:14–24 says only that the Egyptians could not drink it). Essentially, all such natural explanations discount what the Bible says a priori and then seek to explain the event without God. Once again, presuppostions matter.

I hope this helps. God bless.

Bodie