Parting of the red sea, true or false

In the Bible it is written that in order to escape the Pharaoh’s horses chariots horsemen and troops and with the Red Sea in front of them they had no escape route. Then the Lord said to Moses “Why are you crying out to me? Tell the Israelites to move...

on. Raise your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea to divide the water so that the Israelites can go through the sea on dry ground. I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that they will go in after them. And I will gain glory through Pharaoh and all his army, through his chariots and his horseman. The Egyptians will know that I am the Lord when I gain glory through Pharaoh his chariots and his horsemen.”

It further goes on to say that the angel of God withdrew and went behind them. A pillar of cloud also moved from in front and stood behind them, coming between the army’s of Egypt and Israel. Throughout the night the cloud brought darkness to one side and light to the other side.

Then Moses stretched out his hand and there were two walls of water with dry land in the centre. After they crossed they were followed by Pharaoh’s army and the sea drowned them all, by Moses stretching out his hand over the sea so that the waters may flow back.

The Old Testament is a collection of books rather like a Library. For many years, before writing was widely used stories of the past were handed down by word of mouth. Later many of these stories were written down. Later still they were collected together and the Old Testament were formed. These writings were written in Hebrew. The Old Testament took place about 950 B.C.

The Old Testament has been translated from Hebrew to Greek by Alexander the Great by 72 Jewish scholars in about 250 B.C. During Alexander’s time the language that was predominant was Greek.

(The Exodus took place in the reign of Ramses II (1290 – 1224 B.C.))

The New Testament was originally written in Greek. In about 382 Pope Damasus I translated the Bible to Latin. In about 1382 the English Bible appeared.

We read all this hulla bulla, about the Red Sea. But the actual fact is that the Hebrew term Yam Suph means the “Sea of Reeds” and was incorrectly translated as “Red Sea” by Alexander. No reeds grow by the Red Sea, but further north where today the Suez Canal runs, was a shallow lake with reed beds. It was in this knee deep water that the Israelites were able to cross on foot but the chariots that followed them had their wheels entangled and the entire army of Pharaoh was disarranged.

This means that the hulla bulla story of the Red Sea is a big fash. So many movies have been made of this great event, which did not ever take place.

darryl:

As you have seen so far, you will not find any intelligent response to this because few Christians are even aware of the Yam Suph mistranslation. Pointing out to them that the Exodus is not a miracle but just an embellished tribal legend about some people crossing through a shallow marsh may cause them to doubt their faith, and that is not something most of them are prepared to deal with.

The Sea or Reeds is situated on the northern side of the Red sea.
Refer to the Antique Exodus route map as shown above.

Shows the parting of the Red sea by Moses.
Can you imagine to what lengths they go to prove a point.

 
Myth.

I hope you do not take offense,
To that that's gone before;
'Tis only that it's my two-cents,
And not one penny more. §;o)

yah it's true..ofcourse..
from Genisis to Revelation..every word of God is tRUE...

Of course it's true.

There's plenty of proof showing that these events did not take place. Unfortunately, the Old and New Testament, is just a very well written story. And a lot of people are being brainwashed into believing in them. However if you read the bible, there are a ton of inconsistencies, and even more questions then answer. Darryl is correct, in regards to the timeline as to when the books were written, and that the rest was simply thru word of mouth or poorly written transcripts. Therefore the parting of the Red Sea is false.

I hate to nitpick, but this isn't actually a _question_.

Simple: either you accept or reject the Bible as the holy inspired, infallible word of God or you don't - you reject - you can't nit-pick what you like and don't like.

@fau:

The first article is just classic. The bible says eden was near a river that splits in 4, there is such a river, therefore eden really existed! Totally ignoring the possibility that either the match (two matches, actually) is a coincidence, or the far more likely possibilty that although the place described roughly matches a real one, the events described never took place there. If I write a story about a mysterious valley in which dinosaurs still live, and you find the valley described, that doesn't mean the dinosaur part was accurate, too!

As for the second one... this is a hoax perpetrated by notorious fraudstar Ron Wyatt. From http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2004/02/the_popularity_of_religious_no.php :
The article draws on the work of one Ron Wyatt, who is without a doubt one of the most ridiculous con men of the last century. Ron Wyatt claims to have found the landing site of Noah's Ark, the true Mt. Sinai, the Ark of the Covenant, the place where the Red Sea was parted, and even the actual blood of Jesus! He can't actually show you any of those things, mind you, due to fantastic tales of intrigue and hostility that, I think it goes without saying, are directed by Satan himself in his never-ending zeal to bury the Truthtm.

Wyatt is such a fraud that he is an embarrassment even to his fellow creationists. The Adventist organization Tentmaker has produced a webpage debunking most of Wyatt's cons. Christian Information Ministries has also done so, and Answers in Genesis as well.

There's another page debunking his claims - amongst them the chariot wheel - here: http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/index.html

Also, as others have already pointed out, the original red sea mention is a mistranslation. Given that even the bible doesn't claim it happened in the red sea, it's hard to see how a chariot wheel in the red sea would be evidence of it in the first place.

@amblessed: Simple: either you accept or reject the Bible as the holy inspired, infallible word of God or you don't - you reject - you can't nit-pick what you like and don't like.

Oh _really_? Are you telling me that you obey every single stricture in the bible, without nit-pick[ing] what you like and don't like? It's not hard to come up with numerous instructions that I'm pretty sure you don't follow.

its a tale that was past down so it get extravlated

zhen02 :every word of God is tRUE so we should stone our disobeant children, and kill a man with long hair... shall I go on? these are supposed laws of God in old tesement

amblessed: Simple: either you accept or reject the Bible as the holy inspired, infallible word of God or you don't - you reject - you can't nit-pick what you like and don't like.
please tell me you dont realy follow every word

The parting of the red sea is fantasy. The part about escaping through the sea of reeds is also fantasy. The exodus is fantasy.

I believe that what God says is true. I believe that every event in the Bible happened, and no matter how much someone tries to disprove it, I will always believe.

So no matter how much concrete evidence there is that disproves genesis, you will continue to accept it no matter what? Is that what your god wants you to do. Turn your back on discovery and knowledge in favor of blind faith in a book written by superstitious men centuries ago.

The fact that this kind of ignorance still exists in todays world amazes me.

***please tell me you dont realy follow every word***

***Oh _really_? Are you telling me that you obey every single stricture in the bible, without nit-pick[ing] what you like and don't like? It's not hard to come up with numerous instructions that I'm pretty sure you don't follow.***

He doesn't... but he IS still a slave to unconditional belief. He doesn't think for himself, he's just an organic tape recorder; replaying what was programmed. He takes in NOTHING, that is said contrary to his own beliefs. He can't ponder it, process it, or even HEAR it. And he'll die that way too... just another waste of brain matter.

So... on this site, he's kind of like SPAM.

***I'd rather live my life believing in Him and find out that I was wrong than to not believe and find out He does exsist.***

So... you do it out of fear... also sad...

You know... you CAN still believe in God, without thinking that book is perfect... because it ISN'T. It's okay to acknowledge the flaws in the bible, without renouncing your faith.

Turn your back on discovery and knowledge in favor of blind faith in a book written by superstitious men centuries ago.

I don't see any contradictions between the Bible and discovery or science at all. one has to learn how to see the Bible from a more metaphorical standpoint rather than a very literal, childrens storybook perspective

I knew about the mistranslation but not about this...

leevan, I agree that one can still believe in the bible metaphorically, and that does not prevent them from accepting scientific facts. But fau said he beleives every word is absolutely true and is not metaphorical.

finally someone else who sees this!!!

ambless, I don't see how he is rejecting what was originally meant to be said.
Besides, I can probably name a list of things in which you do not follow, or nit-pick at certain things you follow do not, less you're in jail right now, but I doubt that.

*rejecting the bible when that's what it orignally said.

***Simple: either you accept or reject the Bible as the holy inspired, infallible word of God or you don't - you reject - you can't nit-pick what you like and don't like.***

WRONG. As usual...