The Ten Plagues of Egypt- allegorical or historical?

[nPeace]

The best we can hope for is to agree to disagree. I’m pleased you feel better about the outcome and I thought we did better than last time.

It seems clear that you believe the Bible is a book that can be relied on and trusted for historical information.

Yes, that is correct.

I believe that Bible has valuable historical information but its prime focus is NOT to inform us about history. It is to inform us how to live a coherent, moral and spiritual life.

I am glad to know we can agree that the Bible contains valuable historical information.
That is so important to me, because when it comes to Jewish history both in ancient times, and the first century CE, the Bible is foremost.
I believe we do not agree that it is foremost where human history is concerned, since for you, science takes the foremost position, and you believe in the theory that suggest man's history goes back millions of years, contrary to the Biblical history.
I believe you consider Genesis to be mythical stories, based on your trust in the theory of evolution.
We disagree, of course. We can agree to.

To me, the scriptures do more than "inform us how to live a coherent, moral and spiritual life". They provide a history of God's dealings with mankind from their creation, and his promises from that time, into the future.
In my view, without that history, we do not have a sound basis for trust in God, and faith in his promises, since we would erase truths that are key to our understanding God's original purpose, and his "plan of salvation".
There are a number of other issues, I can mention, but this is not the time, unless you want to get into it on this thread.

It achieves that be providing guidance that has been revealed by God Himself that allows us to draw nearer to Him. So its primarily a religious not an historical text for me. So I don’t need the ten plagues of Egypt to be literally true in its entirety to benefit from the Bibles spiritual message. Best Wishes.

I understand your position.
The plagues of Egypt, benefited those living at the time, and it benefited those far away, who heard how Israel's God prevailed over Egypt's gods. It thus served to glorify the name of the God of Israel, and opened the way of salvation, to people of the nations, who were ignorant of the true God.
According to the record this was important to God, as well as the Jews.
(Exodus 9:15, 16) 15 For by now I could have thrust my hand out to strike you and your people with a devastating plague, and you would have been wiped out from the earth. 16 But for this very reason I have kept you in existence: to show you my power and to have my name declared in all the earth.

When nations heard of these things, they feared Israel. Moreover, it benefited people of right heart. For example, Rahab... She said to the men: “I do know that Jehovah will give you the land and that the fear of you has fallen upon us. All the inhabitants of the land are disheartened because of you, for we heard how Jehovah dried up the waters of the Red Sea before you when you left Egypt and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites, Siʹhon and Og, whom you devoted to destruction on the other side of the Jordan. When we heard about it, we lost heart, and no one has any courage because of you, for Jehovah your God is God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath. Now, please, swear to me by Jehovah that, because I showed loyal love to you, you will also show loyal love to my father’s household; and you must give me a sign of good faith. You must spare the lives of my father and mother, my brothers and sisters, and all who belong to them, and you must save us from death.” (Joshua 2:9-13)

Today, that record is important to God's people, just as it was important to Jesus' followers who not only learned lessons from what God did, but also had their faith strengthened by a record of these accounts. See 1 Corinthians 10:1-11; Hebrews 11:1-12:1; Acts 7

God's people see it as history. That to me, is important, but apparently we disagree on that.

 

[Dawnofhope]

That is so important to me, because when it comes to Jewish history both in ancient times, and the first century CE, the Bible is foremost.
I believe we do not agree that it is foremost where human history is concerned, since for you, science takes the foremost position, and you believe in the theory that suggest man's history goes back millions of years, contrary to the Biblical history.
I believe you consider Genesis to be mythical stories, based on your trust in the theory of evolution.
We disagree, of course. We can agree to.

The Bible is one source of historical information amidst many others.

Bahá’ís believe in the harmony between science and religion.

Bahá’ís reject the notion that there is an inherent conflict between science and religion, a notion that became prevalent in intellectual discourse at a time when the very conception of each system of knowledge was far from adequate. The harmony of science and religion is one of the fundamental principles of the Bahá’í Faith, which teaches that religion, without science, soon degenerates into superstition and fanaticism, while science without religion becomes merely the instrument of crude materialism. “Religion,” according to the Bahá’í writings, “is the outer expression of the divine reality. Therefore, it must be living, vitalized, moving and progressive.” “Science is the first emanation from God toward man. All created things embody the potentiality of material perfection, but the power of intellectual investigation and scientific acquisition is a higher virtue specialized to man alone. Other beings and organisms are deprived of this potentiality and attainment.”

Science and Religion | What Bahá’ís Believe

This one principle alone ensures appropriate reverence and adherence to science. If science clearly and absolutely proves something that a religion states as being true, then accept the science.

That frees me of the obligation to believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old. I don't need to take the story of Adam and Eve literally or to believe Adam was the first man. There is no need to believe a worldwide flood happened during the time of Noah.

That does not mean God can not perform miracles. He can. If history is silent about something such as the Israelites living in Egypt during the time of Moses, I accept its possible they may have.

Science can not categorically prove or disprove the existence of the eternal soul as with God Himself. I choose to believe we have a soul that continues beyond this mortal realm. Bahaís believe man was never an animal. That does not mean we always had our current form, just as humans begin as a single cell organism, progress through various forms to become an adult.

To me, the scriptures do more than "inform us how to live a coherent, moral and spiritual life". They provide a history of God's dealings with mankind from their creation, and his promises from that time, into the future.
In my view, without that history, we do not have a sound basis for trust in God, and faith in his promises, since we would erase truths that are key to our understanding God's original purpose, and his "plan of salvation".
There are a number of other issues, I can mention, but this is not the time, unless you want to get into it on this thread.

I agree we need a story or narrative to assist us understand who we are, what our purpose is and where we come from. The Biblical Genesis story worked for centuries. It no longer works because the contradictions with science are too great to ignore. We need a better story or narrative that takes into account that humans now have much greater levels of education in regards history and science.

I understand your position.
The plagues of Egypt, benefited those living at the time, and it benefited those far away, who heard how Israel's God prevailed over Egypt's gods. It thus served to glorify the name of the God of Israel, and opened the way of salvation, to people of the nations, who were ignorant of the true God.
According to the record this was important to God, as well as the Jews.
(Exodus 9:15, 16) 15 For by now I could have thrust my hand out to strike you and your people with a devastating plague, and you would have been wiped out from the earth. 16 But for this very reason I have kept you in existence: to show you my power and to have my name declared in all the earth.

When nations heard of these things, they feared Israel. Moreover, it benefited people of right heart. For example, Rahab... She said to the men: “I do know that Jehovah will give you the land and that the fear of you has fallen upon us. All the inhabitants of the land are disheartened because of you, for we heard how Jehovah dried up the waters of the Red Sea before you when you left Egypt and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites, Siʹhon and Og, whom you devoted to destruction on the other side of the Jordan. When we heard about it, we lost heart, and no one has any courage because of you, for Jehovah your God is God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath. Now, please, swear to me by Jehovah that, because I showed loyal love to you, you will also show loyal love to my father’s household; and you must give me a sign of good faith. You must spare the lives of my father and mother, my brothers and sisters, and all who belong to them, and you must save us from death.” (Joshua 2:9-13)

Today, that record is important to God's people, just as it was important to Jesus' followers who not only learned lessons from what God did, but also had their faith strengthened by a record of these accounts. See 1 Corinthians 10:1-11; Hebrews 11:1-12:1; Acts 7

That all may be true.

God's people see it as history. That to me, is important, but apparently we disagree on that.

To me we are all God's children. Some of His children have turned their backs to God, including those who identify with His name.

God's people in India have a different history through the Vedas and their traditions. However both traditions have their mythical aspects. That is the nature of culture and religion.

So we do have quite different worldviews. The Baha'í view, while maintaining reverence for the Christian scriptures has a more coherent appreciation of science, history and the contribution of cultures beyond Judea-Christianity IMHO. That is what I believe.

 

[nPeace]

The Bible is one source of historical information amidst many others.

Bahá’ís believe in the harmony between science and religion.

Bahá’ís reject the notion that there is an inherent conflict between science and religion, a notion that became prevalent in intellectual discourse at a time when the very conception of each system of knowledge was far from adequate. The harmony of science and religion is one of the fundamental principles of the Bahá’í Faith, which teaches that religion, without science, soon degenerates into superstition and fanaticism, while science without religion becomes merely the instrument of crude materialism. “Religion,” according to the Bahá’í writings, “is the outer expression of the divine reality. Therefore, it must be living, vitalized, moving and progressive.” “Science is the first emanation from God toward man. All created things embody the potentiality of material perfection, but the power of intellectual investigation and scientific acquisition is a higher virtue specialized to man alone. Other beings and organisms are deprived of this potentiality and attainment.”

Science and Religion | What Bahá’ís Believe

This one principle alone ensures appropriate reverence and adherence to science. If science clearly and absolutely proves something that a religion states as being true, then accept the science.

That frees me of the obligation to believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old. I don't need to take the story of Adam and Eve literally or to believe Adam was the first man. There is no need to believe a worldwide flood happened during the time of Noah.

That does not mean God can not perform miracles. He can. If history is silent about something such as the Israelites living in Egypt during the time of Moses, I accept its possible they may have.

Science can not categorically prove or disprove the existence of the eternal soul as with God Himself. I choose to believe we have a soul that continues beyond this mortal realm. Bahaís believe man was never an animal. That does not mean we always had our current form, just as humans begin as a single cell organism, progress through various forms to become an adult.

So there are some things you choose to believe, though science have not, and may not, and possibly cannot verify.
May I ask then, why do you insist there must be evidence for various events in the Bible... such as the plagues in Egypt?
If someone chooses to believe, based on a number of reasons (previously mentioned}, how do you feel about that?

Oh, and what about persons who read the Bible with the understanding that the earth is more than a few thousand years old, and may be millions of years old, while mankind's existing on earth is only a few thousand years old - starting with Adam and Eve? How do you view them?

You said... "If science clearly and absolutely proves something". Yet scientists have argued that science does not prove anything. Do you believe this is opinion?
Has science clearly and absolutely proved that mankind existed more than a few thousand years on earth?
I have not seen that.

I agree we need a story or narrative to assist us understand who we are, what our purpose is and where we come from. The Biblical Genesis story worked for centuries. It no longer works because the contradictions with science are too great to ignore. We need a better story or narrative that takes into account that humans now have much greater levels of education in regards history and science.

The contradictions with science, or the contradictions with philosophy?
I have not seen any science that contradicts the Bible. Theory in science, is not proof of anything... as we are seeing all the time.
If you don't mind, I would be interested in hearing those "many" contradictions.
I have a thread that's appropriate for that here. I am not sure if you had anything to say there.

That all may be true.

To me we are all God's children. Some of His children have turned their backs to God, including those who identify with His name.

God's people in India have a different history through the Vedas and their traditions. However both traditions have their mythical aspects. That is the nature of culture and religion.

So we do have quite different worldviews. The Baha'í view, while maintaining reverence for the Christian scriptures has a more coherent appreciation of science, history and the contribution of cultures beyond Judea-Christianity IMHO. That is what I believe.

Thanks. I don't think Jesus and his first century followers had anything against science, and certainly his followers today have nothing against science. However, all of them did, and do have something against falsely called science. I do too.

 

[Dawnofhope]

So there are some things you choose to believe, though science have not, and may not, and possibly cannot verify.

Correct.

May I ask then, why do you insist there must be evidence for various events in the Bible... such as the plagues in Egypt?

I don't insist there must be evidence for various events in the Bible. However if I am to believe in some things I may wish to consider the evidence before I decide one way or another.

There is no direct and clear evidence to my knowledge that supports the ten plagues of Egypt. I don't know whether or not it happened. There may be some historicity to the story or there may not.

If someone chooses to believe, based on a number of reasons (previously mentioned}, how do you feel about that?

It doesn't bother me. We are all entitled to our beliefs.

Oh, and what about persons who read the Bible with the understanding that the earth is more than a few thousand years old, and may be millions of years old, while mankind's existing on earth is only a few thousand years old - starting with Adam and Eve? How do you view them?

As above. It is not what I personally belief but I'm comfortable with differences of opinion.

You said... "If science clearly and absolutely proves something". Yet scientists have argued that science does not prove anything. Do you believe this is opinion?

I'm a pragmatist, not an idealist. For example if we were to consider two competing models about the earth in relation to the sun (heliocentric vs geocentric) I would presume the evidence much more strongly in favour of the heliocentric model. So there's more to it than mere opinion.

Has science clearly and absolutely proved that mankind existed more than a few thousand years on earth?
I have not seen that.

The evidence strongly supports the existence of humans being on earth much longer than six thousand years.

The contradictions with science, or the contradictions with philosophy?

Both.

I have not seen any science that contradicts the Bible. Theory in science, is not proof of anything... as we are seeing all the time.

Nor have I, but I don't view the Bible as advocating that certain events written were historic.

If you don't mind, I would be interested in hearing those "many" contradictions.

1/ The earth was created in six days, six thousand years ago based on an interpretation of Genesis by some Christians.

2/ There was no worldwide flood as understood by some Christians based on the story of Noah in Genesis.

3/ The story of Adam and Eve isn't a literal account of events.

The Stories of Genesis: Myth or Literally True

I have a thread that's appropriate for that here. I am not sure if you had anything to say there.

I didn't contribute to the thread.

Thanks. I don't think Jesus and his first century followers had anything against science, and certainly his followers today have nothing against science. However, all of them did, and do have something against falsely called science. I do too.

I'm weary of discussions involving biblical literalists and atheist scientists. Its not something that interests me to the extent I would want to devote too much time engaging in such discussions, particularly with the biblical literalists.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe you consider Genesis to be mythical stories, based on your trust in the theory of evolution.
We disagree, of course. We can agree to.

You don't need to accept evolution to recognize Genesis as mythical.

The Garden of Eden story is about a man named "Man," a woman named "Woman," and a serpent named "Serpent." It's pretty obvious - to me, at least - that they're intended as archetypes and not literal historical figures.

It's the original "Just-So Story." And just as you don't need to know anything about biology to recognize that Kipling's Elephant's Child isn't intended to be taken literally ("is that how elephants really got their trunks? Let's do a study," said nobody ever) we can recognize the same thing about most of the stories in Genesis.

 

[Muffled]

You don't need to accept evolution to recognize Genesis as mythical.

The Garden of Eden story is about a man named "Man," a woman named "Woman," and a serpent named "Serpent." It's pretty obvious - to me, at least - that they're intended as archetypes and not literal historical figures.

It's the original "Just-So Story." And just as you don't need to know anything about biology to recognize that Kipling's Elephant's Child isn't intended to be taken literally ("is that how elephants really got their trunks? Let's do a study," said nobody ever) we can recognize the same thing about most of the stories in Genesis.

I believe you don't need Genesis to realize that evolution is only an unproven theory.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe you don't need Genesis to realize that evolution is only an unproven theory.

I have no doubt that you do believe this. Doesn't make the Bible a reliable source of fact, though.