-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
parting of the sea
- Thread starter jeremiah
- Start date
Yes I do believe in the literal story of the parting of the Red Sea.
I don't believe in the parting of the Reed Sea - a shallower 5-inch deep crossing further north of the recorded crossing; an "explanation" some scientists give. If so, then it'd be an even greater miracle: for then it would mean that the whole Egyptian army drowned in just a few inches of water!
I don't believe in the parting of the Reed Sea - a shallower 5-inch deep crossing further north of the recorded crossing; an "explanation" some scientists give. If so, then it'd be an even greater miracle: for then it would mean that the whole Egyptian army drowned in just a few inches of water!
Upvote
0
Actually, there's some cool information on this one...but I've got to try and make it shorter than it deserves...
Basically, the traditional Mt. Sinai (as pointed out in your Bible atlas) is wrong. It was first called that by Constantines mom in like the 3rd century, and later back up by Mohammed (who we know is a false prophet because he denied Christ's membership in the Godhead.)
The Bible actually places Mt. Sinai in ARABIA (Galatians 4:25. Furthermore, both Moses and Elijah were on Mt Sinai at one point in their lives (not including the actual Exodus), and it was in the ancient land of Midian. Midian in your Bible atlas is clearly in present day Saudi Arabia, which, coincidentally is ancient Arabia (as Galatians mentioned.)
Now, we know the Bible is never wrong, so...
Two men, who I'm am fortunate enough to know, snuck into the country (which was wrong of them), and tried to find the actual site using the Bible as their only map. Get this:
They found so much tangible evidence (on video!) that the Exodus cannot be denied! (go to www.baseinstitute.org for details) but the meat of it is this:
Between the southeastern tip of the traditional sinai and the land of midian (at a place called lands ending), there is an underwater land bridge which stretches the entire width of the sea at that place. Some places its as shallow as five feet, other places its much much deeper. None the less, its a bit coincidental, don't you think.
So, YES!!!! The Sea was parted by God and the Exodus occurred in all the Bible's Truth! Praise God for His glorious works!
Peace to all who seek it,
<><
Basically, the traditional Mt. Sinai (as pointed out in your Bible atlas) is wrong. It was first called that by Constantines mom in like the 3rd century, and later back up by Mohammed (who we know is a false prophet because he denied Christ's membership in the Godhead.)
The Bible actually places Mt. Sinai in ARABIA (Galatians 4:25. Furthermore, both Moses and Elijah were on Mt Sinai at one point in their lives (not including the actual Exodus), and it was in the ancient land of Midian. Midian in your Bible atlas is clearly in present day Saudi Arabia, which, coincidentally is ancient Arabia (as Galatians mentioned.)
Now, we know the Bible is never wrong, so...
Two men, who I'm am fortunate enough to know, snuck into the country (which was wrong of them), and tried to find the actual site using the Bible as their only map. Get this:
They found so much tangible evidence (on video!) that the Exodus cannot be denied! (go to www.baseinstitute.org for details) but the meat of it is this:
Between the southeastern tip of the traditional sinai and the land of midian (at a place called lands ending), there is an underwater land bridge which stretches the entire width of the sea at that place. Some places its as shallow as five feet, other places its much much deeper. None the less, its a bit coincidental, don't you think.
So, YES!!!! The Sea was parted by God and the Exodus occurred in all the Bible's Truth! Praise God for His glorious works!
Peace to all who seek it,
<><
Upvote
0
Thunderchild
Sheep in Wolf's clothing
And yet - the generally accepted location of Mt Sinai is three days forced march from the location of the Red Sea (not six days, as it would have been from the northern route)
If we are to accept the reed sea scenario as valid: Not only do we have the entire* Egyptian army drowned in four or five inches of water, but a mass group of civilians including very elderly (and very young) afoot traversed in three days a distance that a disciplined and fit group of soldiers could not achieve in five.
For all that, there is a northern route detailed in the Bible. This would be logically consistent with the conditions of the exodus - with two main groups of refugees converging on a locus, with those from the south arriving by a different route to those from the north.
* The Biblical reference to "entire" refers to all the army in pursuit of the Hebrews. It is highly unlikely that Pharaoh would have despatched his entire army in pursuit of Israel.
If we are to accept the reed sea scenario as valid: Not only do we have the entire* Egyptian army drowned in four or five inches of water, but a mass group of civilians including very elderly (and very young) afoot traversed in three days a distance that a disciplined and fit group of soldiers could not achieve in five.
For all that, there is a northern route detailed in the Bible. This would be logically consistent with the conditions of the exodus - with two main groups of refugees converging on a locus, with those from the south arriving by a different route to those from the north.
* The Biblical reference to "entire" refers to all the army in pursuit of the Hebrews. It is highly unlikely that Pharaoh would have despatched his entire army in pursuit of Israel.
Upvote
0
I am not referring to the "reed sea" hypothesis in any way. I agree that it is very flawed.
Again, check out the website or read the book. This is something very recent (last 10 year), and full-on archeoligically documented. It is so obvious that to argue against it is to ignore the nose on your face. But you need to go to the site and take the time to read the texts and check out the photos (amazing photos!).
Peace to all who seek it,
<><
Again, check out the website or read the book. This is something very recent (last 10 year), and full-on archeoligically documented. It is so obvious that to argue against it is to ignore the nose on your face. But you need to go to the site and take the time to read the texts and check out the photos (amazing photos!).
Peace to all who seek it,
<><
Upvote
0
Thunderchild
Sheep in Wolf's clothing
So far it seems kosher, Othniel - but (being a natural born and dyed in the wool skeptic) I'll keep a watch for further information about the authors.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Similar threads
