Who Believes This?

Do you believe this?


  • Total voters
    5

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,158
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,525.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
QV please:
It may come as a surprise to many students of the Bible that in the original Hebrew text the body of water the Israelites crossed when leaving Egypt is called yam suph, “Sea of Reeds,” not Red Sea (Ex 15:4, 22; Dt 11:4; Jos 2:10; 4:23; 24:6; Neh 9:9; Ps 106:7, 9, 33; 136:13, 15). Unfortunately, yam suph has been rendered “Red Sea” in nearly all of our translations, the Jerusalem Bible and the New Jewish Publication Society Hebrew Bible being notable exceptions.

SOURCE

Do you believe this? have YOU been taught this in a classroom, church, or synagogue?

In addition, why does it say, "unfortunately"?

Unfortunate for whom?
 

essentialsaltes

Stranger in a Strange Land
Oct 17, 2011
33,294
36,609
Los Angeles Area
✟830,356.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Certainly I've heard that. I have no reason to doubt that 'reed' is the literal translation of the word, and there does seem to be disagreement about what actual body of water is being referred to.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,158
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,525.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Last edited:
Upvote 0

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟109,655.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
There's an old Sunday School joke related to this that sums up my feelings about it. In essence, it doesn't matter. Further, why wouldn't you want an accurate translation? If Moses didn't write "Red Sea", why would you want to perpetuate calling it that? ... oh, wait ... KJVer and all that. Never mind.

Anyway, the joke. A Sunday School teacher is reading about the flight of the Israelites in Exodus, and when she comes to the crossing and the death of the Egyptians, a little boy shouts, "Praise God!" The teacher explains, "I hate to tell you this, but historians think they crossed at a place where the water was only a few inches deep." Again the boy shouts, "Praise God!" "Didn't you hear me?" the teacher asks. "Yes," the boy explains. "Isn't it a miracle that God stopped all those Egyptians with only a few inches of water?!"

While funny, it actually makes sense and has historical precedent. It WOULD be difficult for a large army to cross a muddy mess where the horses, chariots, heavy armaments - whatever it was the Egyptians had - would get bogged down. That very issue was a major factor in the English victory over the French at Agincourt.

Regardless, whether it's Red Sea or Reed Sea, it won't change the fact that unbelievers don't believe in Moses at all.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,158
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,525.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Regardless, whether it's Red Sea or Reed Sea, it won't change the fact that unbelievers don't believe in Moses at all.
After you first heard that, were you reinforced in an academic setting?
 
Upvote 0

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟109,655.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
After you first heard that, were you reinforced in an academic setting?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you asking if I learned about it in college? No, I did not. Even though I attended a public university, I only recall one instance where the subject of religion ever came up in class. Further, I was part of a strong Christian community when I was in college.

I first learned about this when I was very young - in Sunday School as I implied per the joke. It was only a passing reference and honestly didn't make much impact on me at the time. It wasn't presented as an important detail at the time and I don't personally know of anyone who has ever considered it an important detail.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,158
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,525.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
-
Never heard that, but that does not surprise me as there are many (at least 3) places in The Bible where parts of a verse has been changed.
There are more than ten in the OP alone.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
12,340
7,679
51
✟314,979.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
QV please:


SOURCE

Do you believe this? have YOU been taught this in a classroom, church, or synagogue?

In addition, why does it say, "unfortunately"?

Unfortunate for whom?
It would make it a lot easier to walk through. Let's say it's true.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,158
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,525.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I heard this decades ago in a television show that was examining historical aspects of Bible stories. Seems reasonable. It would make more sense to lead a large group of people to the Reed Sea than the Red Sea.
God led them there on purpose.

Moses was caught between a rock and a hard place.

Exodus 14:9 But the Egyptians pursued after them, all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh, and his horsemen, and his army, and overtook them encamping by the sea, beside Pihahiroth, before Baalzephon.

When the people complained that they were gonna die, Moses gave one of the most famous lines in the Bible of all time:

Exodus 14:13 And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will shew to you to day: for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to day, ye shall see them again no more for ever.
14 The LORD shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace.
 
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,369
7,745
Canada
✟722,927.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
QV please:


SOURCE

Do you believe this? have YOU been taught this in a classroom, church, or synagogue?

In addition, why does it say, "unfortunately"?

Unfortunate for whom?
Either way, the Egyptian army got drowned. if it was just a small puddle, that just makes God bigger.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Sabertooth
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,158
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,525.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Either way, the Egyptian army got drowned. if it was just a small puddle, that just makes God bigger.
We don't need academia to make God look bigger, do we?
 
Upvote 0

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
1,638
740
Southeast
✟48,334.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I heard this decades ago in a television show that was examining historical aspects of Bible stories. Seems reasonable. It would make more sense to lead a large group of people to the Reed Sea than the Red Sea.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
4,920
3,980
✟277,840.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
What I find intriguing if Exodus is supposed to be based on historical events, how one of the central characters is simply identified as "Pharaoh".
While the consensus amongst most scholars, archaeologists and Egyptologists is the biblical portrayal of Exodus is not based on historical events it hasn't stopped various individuals over the centuries such as Manetho, Josephus, Sigmund Freud and Isaac Asimov speculating on the pharaoh's identity.

Pepi I (24th - 23rd century BC): Emmanuel Anati has argued that the Exodus should be placed between the 24th and the 21st century BC and that Pepi I should be identified as the pharaoh of the Exodus. This theory has not gained acceptance and has received strong criticism from Israeli archaeologist Israel Finkelstein and American Egyptologist James K. Hoffmeier.

Dedumose II (died c. 1690 BC): David Rohl's 1995 A Test of Time revised Egyptian history by shortening the Third Intermediate Period of Egypt by almost 300 years. As a result, the synchronisms with the biblical narrative results in the Second Intermediate period King Dedumose II the pharaoh of the Exodus. Rohl's revision has been turned down by the vast majority of Egyptologists.

Ahmose I (1550–1525 BC): Several church fathers identified Ahmose I, who reconquered lower Egypt from the Hyksos, rulers of Asiatic (Semitic) origin, as the pharaoh of the Exodus, based on Herodotus, Manetho, Josephus and other classical authors’ identification of the Hyksos with the Hebrews.

Hatshepsut (1507–1458 BC). Diodorus Siculus identified the Jews with the Hyksos and identified the pharaoh of the Exodus with Queen Hatshepsut.

Thutmose II (1493–1479 BC). Alfred Edersheim proposes in Old Testament Bible History that Thutmose II is best qualified to be the pharaoh of Exodus based on the fact that he had a brief, prosperous reign and then a sudden collapse with no legitimate son to succeed him. His widow Hatshepsut then became first regent (for Thutmose III, his son by his concubine Iset) before becoming pharaoh herself. Edersheim states that Thutmose II is the only pharaoh's mummy to display cysts, possible evidence of plagues that spread through the Egyptian and Hittite Empires at that time.

Akhenaten (1353–1349 BC). In his book Moses and Monotheism, Sigmund Freud argued that Moses had been an Atenist priest of Akhenaten who was forced to leave Egypt, along with his followers, following the pharaoh's death. Eusebius identified the pharaoh of the Exodus with a king called "Acencheres", who may be identified with Akenhaten.

Ramesses I (1292-1290 BC): Ahmed Osman identified Ramesses I as the pharaoh of the Exodus in his controversial argument about the identity of the Egyptian official Yuya.

Ramesses II (c. 1279–1213 BC): Ramesses II, or Ramesses The Great, is the most common figure for the Exodus pharaoh as one of the most long-standing rulers at the height of Egyptian power and because Rameses is mentioned in the Bible as a place name (see Genesis 47:11, Exodus 1:11, Numbers 33:3, etc). As such, he is often the pharaoh depicted in popular culture narratives of the event (such as the 1956 film The Ten Commandments and the 1998 animated film The Prince of Egypt). Although Ramesses II's late 13th Century BC stela in Beth Shan mentions two conquered peoples who came to "make obeisance to him" in his city of Raameses or Pi-Ramesses, the text mentions neither the building of the city nor, as some have written, the Israelites or Hapiru.

Merneptah (c. 1213–1203 BC): Isaac Asimov in Guide to the Bible makes a case for Merneptah to be the pharaoh of the Exodus.

Setnakhte (c. 1189–1186 BC): Igor P. Lipovsky and Israel Knohl make a case for Setnakhte to be the pharaoh of the Exodus.

Ramesses III (c. 1186–1155 BC): Gary A. Rendsburg, Baruch Halpern and Manfred Bietak make a case for Ramesses III as the pharaoh of the Exodus.

Bakenranef (c. 725-720 BC): Tacitus writes in his Histories that Bakenranef (whom he refers to as "Bocchoris") had expelled the Jews from Egypt because they suffered from a horrible disease and because he was instructed to do so by an oracle of the god Amun. Lysimachus of Alexandria, quoted by Josephus in Against Apion, also identifies the pharaoh of the Exodus with Bakenranef.

Ramses (?-?). Manetho and Chaeremon of Alexandria, both quoted by Josephus in Against Apion, state that the Jews were expelled from Egypt by a pharaoh named "Ramses", son of another pharaoh named "Amenophis". It is unclear which pharaoh this could be, since no pharaoh named Ramses had a predecessor named Amenophis.
 
Upvote 0

Blade

Veteran
Site Supporter
Dec 29, 2002
8,167
3,992
USA
✟630,797.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If one does not know Christ then you will never understand it will be foolishness to you "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

So try as they might they will never understand. Now I clicked the link then read what others said about this and .. yeah huge difference here. This link leaves out allot of detail. I liked this "There is general agreement among scholars today, both liberal and conservative, that yam suph means “Reed Sea.” There is a truth in this yet not. Its not a "general agreement". Kinda like people saying in the end times there will come a great falling away. Yep that's one meaning of the word another that was used and written in the bible was "departure". So some links agree others do not.. and if one knows about this.. its not that easy. One word used 4 times then the other many times in the word blah blah blah
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,158
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,525.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If one does not know Christ then you will never understand it will be foolishness to you "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
I agree.

They can understand, but only to a certain point, then they need the "Key to Fuller Understanding."

That Key, of course, being Jesus Christ.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums