I grew up thinking maybe God used natural events to cause the 10 plagues and the crossing (by a wind). but now when reading it says God brought them out with a Mighty Hand, means He did it supernaturally and where nobody could deny God did it.
Personally I think Moshe, the Holy Spirit and Psalmist knew the difference between a lake and a sea. Psalm 106:9 He rebuked the Red sea also, and it was dried up: so he led them through the depths, as through the wilderness.
You have to have a channel of water long and wide enough to hold the entire Egyptian army (250,000 plus chariots and horses) in battle formation and a wall of water deep enough so that NOT ONE of them escapes. Nuweiba Beach at the Gulf of Aqaba is the only site I know of which can accomplish that event.
The text in Hebrew is written in a way that shows the water stacked up in words. In the text itself, the words written showing a physical picture, tell exactly that story. Deep water and they passed thru as if thru walls of water.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
As a researcher and engineer I personally think the answer lies is how WIDE the path was. I think it was at least 5-6000 yards WIDE..maybe more. So, lost in perspective was the RISK. Thus, Pharoah's army was "not afraid", they were too distant from the WALL of water to realize the depth and height of the waters.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ? Proving the Exodus Gulf of Suez side Reed Sea Crossing: FIRST DAY “And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand (“from Rameses”) in the sight of all the Egyptians.” (Numbers 33:3) For THREE DAYS they travelled into the wilderness, well within reach of Pharaoh’s army: The 15th Abib therefore was not then and is not now a weekly Sabbath day. The 15th Abib they all travelled and camped at Succoth (see Exodus 12:37). SECOND DAY The 16th Abib they travelled again until afternoon and camped at Etham (see Exodus 13:20). THIRD DAY The 17th Abib Yahweh instructed them to turn away from exiting Egypt and to travel further down the within Egypt proper and camp at Pihahiroth (see Exodus 14:2) - against the body of water that Yahweh parted for them after sunset starting the 4th day. Only now Pharaoh thought that they had intended to actually try and escape Egypt, but had somehow made a wrong turn (see Exodus 14:3-9). Leaving Egypt was never on Pharaoh’s agenda ! "Entangled" here between the desert mountains and the sea, Pharaoh’s spies told him the Israelites were trapped and he personally lead his army in to guarantee their return to bondage. END OF THREE DAYS TRAVEL Starting the 4th day 18th Abib NIGHT Yahweh parted the Red Sea and the Israelites passed through safely. There is a THREE DAY - FOURTH DAY pattern here: Three days creation without light upon the earth - light "upon the earth" given on the fourth day. Three days in the dark tomb/belly of the earth - resurrection starting the fourth day etc. and other 3x - 4x occurrences in the Bible.
Yahweh instructed Moses to turn away from their course and to travel towards Pihahiroth - where they were soon cornered between the mountains and the sea that Yahweh parted. Unfortunately every different theorist places Pihahiroth where it suits his crossing point, without any proof to back it up.
That Jewish guy talking about God being able to suffer for us “by taking in the arrows” as well as loving us sounds exactly like the Christian belief that God “the Son” came down to take on sinless human flesh to suffer for us in our place on the cross and take on our death/sin/punishment so that those who believe shall inherit His righteousness that we may be perfect in the sight of God on judgement day! That we may enter into the eternal Kingdom of God Almighty to reign with God forever! I pray you believe in the Christ who died for us, who also rose from the dead for us that we may rise from the dead on the last day in righteousness! Glory to God Almighty!
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
When we look at old texts, we need to also look at in which way others wrote at that time. And the further back we go, the more HEROIC stories, less objective and scientific they were. In Egypt the Pharao was ALONE on the battlefield and slew 300 men... the point was not to give an objective description of the event, but describe the main persons greatness. Same should be expected of the texts, where Moses takes the Israelites out of Egypt.... it is not an objective, detailed accurate description, but a story to tell how great Moses was who led them out.
Those who study their Bible will not have a hard time with this answer. Those who try to shoe horn in a shallow crossing theory are simply wanting to dismiss the miracles of God and explain it by their "science". They've tried the same dog and pony show with the plagues of Egypt. Don't fall for it. Make them explains ALL of the miraculous events. Not just a few. They can't.
The most miraculous event is CREATION ITSELF!! The deniers have been chasing their tales about that since the first addlepated human denied Divine Creation.
Another thins is this: Could you walk through a 4 or 5 story high set of waves on either side and not get scared half to death that this is going to crash on you? I doubt the Israelites could do that without freaking out even before they entered such a funnel.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
I think I agree with Professor Rohl, only I think that the situation was not a division on both sides, but on one side, like the tide going out of the waters and a long tide, then a large tidal wave coming in. We are assuming that Moses and his people were well on their way across said waters when Pharoah decided to take the same crossing to pursuit. Nobody in their right mind, a king or a general, would send an army into the water to be drowned, so something else must have happened and suddenly.
I used google earth to check water depths . To me there is a possibility that you are missing a third option , i.e., the north end of the Gulf of Suez ! It is about 200 feet deep !
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Again with the Nuweiba Beach crossing. The biggest Miracle with that is the entire deserts of Shur and Etham had to be carried on eagles' wings to Midian. The report on Canaanite cities. DT 1:28 Where can we go up? Our brothers have made our hearts melt, by saying, “The people are bigger and taller than we; the cities are large and fortified up to heaven. Goodness, the cities are fortified up to HEAVEN. They didn't exaggerate height one bit. Then there is the physics. A wind does not blow water at right angles to its direction.
But you have to accept something else: That Moses wrote the first 5 books of the bible called the Torah. That is highly debated among scholars. Because if he did not write it then that opens another debate about when it was written down in its final form.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
6:00 min: James Hoffmeier: "I think one has to be very careful when taking the poetics of the prophets or... the book of psalms and reading literal readings back into the texts of Exodus 14 and 15." True... only the poems use language of great depth. Nonetheless this water-body was deep enough to drown in.
Which would still be either. Gulf of suez is up to 230’ and gulf of Aqaba is up to 6100’ deep. Gulf of Aqaba requires them to walk down through a trench over a mile deep then back up it. Where as the gulf of suez is relatively flat. Gulf of suez seems more plausible without more investigation into it than I’ve done
@@krakoosh1No it does NOT, there is a literal land-bridge IN the gulf of Aqaba at Nuiweba beach. Exactly where the crossing occurred. And actually READ Exodus. There was nowhere to go they had just come through a valley with high cliff walls on both sides. Which is exactly what you find at Nuiweba beach. It is a literal fit to a T. Everything about that location. They’ve done the dives and they’ve found the remains. Spoked wheels that had a number of spokes ONLY used in the chariots of the 18th dynasty. Which was the current dynasty at the time of the exodus under Amenhotep II. The “young & arrogant” pharaoh that came along. The one who then crawled back to Egypt with his tail between his legs in defeat. He was not drowned in the sea with his army.
I can also drop a lot of artifacts overboard in the Gulf of Aqaba, return two years later when they are full of barnacles and call it 'evidence' - that proves nothing ! Has this 'evidence' been examined and verified by experts ? NO !
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
What sets the context is the distance. How far AWAY were the "walls of water"? The further away, the deeper they might be, but look more shallow and less fearful than close or near by. The TEXTS do not tell us that.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
@@Michael-pn5lp You make some interesting points and I enjoyed reading them. A few things are against us finding this place. 1. 3000 years of geological changes. 2. Lack of clarity in depth of water, width of opening, and length of path through the waters. 3. Multiple paths that fit the exodus. Everything documented by Moses happened and is true. I believe 100% the story (Luke 24.44). It could be that the miracle is BIGGER than we realize. By that I mean the width of the opening might have been WIDER than we think naturally. IF the width is wider than we think, the depth of the Red Sea as a problem goes away. IF the water is far away, ti would simply look like a wall in the distance. Nuweiba would fit perfectly if we assume the WIDTH of the path was miles wide, not a narrow trail. Being tremendously WIDE would make people feel SAFER, and the Egyptian armies more bold to follow.
@@rlu1956 The Great Bitter Lake is also bordered on the west side by desert and mountains 150-200 meters high, and the Gulf of Suez possibly extended into this lake - I no longer have the evidence of it's ancient shoreline. So this scenario is definitely within the THREE day travel limit to the crossing point.
@@rlu1956 Moses did have faith in Yahweh, but he was not privy to all Yahweh's intentions, neither were Pharaoh or his people. Moses only relayed Yahweh's instructions to the Israelites or to Pharaoh as pertinent. Moses knew no better, but as Paul said he had Faith. Moses had repeatedly asked Pharaoh to let the Israelites journey three days into the wilderness: to sacrifice to Yahweh (see Exodus 3:18; 5:3; 8:27). The intention, request and understanding was that they would actually return to Pharaoh when they were finished, which is why Pharaoh was going to allow only the men to go at first (see Exodus 10:8- 11).
After more plagues Pharaoh was going to allow them all to go, but the herds and flocks were to remain behind, as they were all going to return (see Exodus 10:24-26).
Moses demanded all the flocks and herds to go as well, because he didn't know exactly what sacrifice Yahweh required, yet they were never meant to permanently leave Pharaoh (see Exodus 8:28).
Yahweh hardened Pharaoh’s heart and only after the 10th plague on the night of the Passover, did he finally give his consent.
Only now Pharaoh relented to all demands, after his own firstborn son was dead, as Yahweh and Moses had originally warned him ! (see Exodus 12:30-33). Pharaoh now actually ordered them to: “go, serve Yahweh, as ye have said. Also take your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone; and bless me also.” i.e. all travel three days into the wilderness with flocks and herds to sacrifice to Yahweh “as ye have said”, bless Pharaoh as well - and return again afterwards !
In the early hours of this morning, after starting the three day trek into the Egyptian wilderness at night before sunrise, the Israelites passed by at dawn in sight of all Egypt burying their firstborn. The Egyptians had already gladly lent the Israelites their prized jewelry and possessions to appease their God (Exodus 12:35-36), but stubborn Pharaoh had brought on this final tenth plague, killing all their firstborn - just as Pharaoh had killed the newborn male Israelites at Moses’ birth !
The whole of Egypt was party to and profited from Pharaoh’s crimes ! This was no “day of gladness” - just yet ! This was a somber procession !
“And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand (“from Rameses”) in the sight of all the Egyptians.” (Numbers 33:3)
For THREE DAYS they travelled into the wilderness, well within reach of Pharaoh’s army:
The 15th Abib therefore was not then and is not now a weekly Sabbath day. 1st day 2nd day 3rd day The 15th Abib they all travelled and camped at Succoth (see Exodus 12:37). The 16th Abib they travelled again until afternoon and camped at Etham (see Exodus 13:20). The 17th Abib Yahweh instructed them to turn away from exiting Egypt eastwards above the top end of the Red Sea (Gulf of Suez), and to travel further down the west side within Egypt and camp at Pihahiroth (see Exodus 14:2). Only now Pharaoh thought that they were going to actually try and escape Egypt, but had somehow made a wrong turn (see Exodus 14:3-9). Leaving Egypt was never on Pharaoh’s agenda ! Enclosed here between the desert mountains and the sea, Pharaoh’s spies told him the Israelites were trapped and he personally lead his army in to guarantee their return to bondage.
Starting the 4th day 18th Abib NIGHT Yahweh parted the Red Sea and the Israelites passed through safely:
“And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them:” (Exodus 14:19).
This “angel of God” was Christ Himself:
“Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:1-4).
He is our Shepherd - the Stone of Israel - see Genesis 49:24 ! “And Moses STRECHED FORTH HIS HAND OVER THE SEA, and the sea returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled against it; and Yahweh overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea. And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them. But the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. THUS Yahweh saved Israel THAT DAY out of the hand of the Egyptians; and Israel saw the Egyptians dead¡ upon the sea shore. And Israel saw that great work which Yahweh did upon the Egyptians: and the people feared Yahweh, and believed Yahweh, and his servant Moses” (Exodus 14:27-31).
@@Michael-pn5lp I am not SOLD on any view yet, per se. 3000 years of topical changes in the region might be the road block keeping us from ever really discovering the site. The Bible is clear, the WALLS of water were significant. The TERROR of the miracle was real, the judgement brought upon EGYPT significant. The returning of the waters wiped out Egypt's army present...not one survived. So, as you study the biblical references to the great miracle, remember word for word what Moses wrote through the Spirit. The walls of water...were HUGE...killers of thousands.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Woods says this other location would take a miracle, but the degree of miracle matters too. To meet the lowest threshold of needing a miracle-how low do you go? And how far do you stretch the language. Would it be a miracle if the knee deep water was just really muddy so no one could cross. A big wind came, and dried it out so that it was passable. But the wind died down and the Egyptians got stuck in the mud and eventually died of dehydration. Maybe they didn’t even really die, and that was poetic too. They just didn’t want to get their feet wet so they went out a little way but turned back as the water slowly trickled back in. After all, the crashing down of the water is just poetic. That would have been a miracle, right? If all these guys are looking for is the best explanation with mostly natural causes or just natural cause and impeccable timing, I think they’re missing the point.
I agree with that outlook. There is more than one way to see the miracle of the crossing in Exodus. There is no way in the world the General or the King would have sent his entire host of soldiers on horses and chariots into the sea to simply be destroyed. That is simply nuts.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
OK, Let's say there was a wall of water on each side. A wall of water, say like, ... the walls of Jericho (an interesting comparison). From the archaeological excavations at Tell es-Sultan, City IV (the city Joshua conquered), we know the stone retaining wall of Jericho was about 12-15 ft high and the mud brick wall on top was 20-26 ft high. This makes the height of Jericho's walls 32 to 41 ft tall. This is basically the height of a 3 to 4 story building. There are buildings this tall on either side of the street in the city I live in, so I can go walking down the street with 3 to 4 story buildings on each side of me. If I look up at them on either side of main street and imagine they were not buildings, but walls of water, it can be somewhat intimidating. It is kind of scary. Would 30 to 40 ft. of water be deep ? When I imagine these buildings, are walls of water and I am walking between them, it does indeed appear to be deep. Could soldiers on chariots be drowned if these "walls of water (30 to 40 ft. tall)" were to suddenly collapse ? Emphatically YES !! No Problem There ! It is significant to know that some of the large lakes along the Isthmus of Suez during Late Bronze Age, were that deep and some of them does fit the description in the text. So from the archaeogeological evidence many of these lakes were not to be thought of as "shallow waters". Depth is a subjective description, and depth can be used as hyperbole and have spiritual symbolic meanings. I don't see the discussion on depth anywhere near as important as how long the distance from shore to shore is. Consider that a particular number of chariots (six hundred chosen chariots - Ex. 14:7) have to fit within the parted sea for the water to close on all of them and drown them. Two considerations here. How long from shore to shore, and how wide ? Be Well, DZ
I watched this and listen to all the men talk and all I can say is in (ISAIAH CHAPTER 29 VERSE 14 SAYS THEREFORE,BEHOLD, I WILL AGAIN DO A MARVELOUS WORK AMONG THIS PEOPLE, A MARVELOUS AND WONDER;( FOR THE WISDOM OF THEIR WISE MEN SHALL PERISH, AND THE UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR PRUDENT MEN SHALL BE HIDDEN. So is this happening now with these men that are saying Moses get it all wrong and it didn't happen the way he said it did????
Everyone seems to not understand why Pharaoh's heart was hardened. He saw himself as a god. And because of that he went after Moses in the sea. In his heart who is Moses? said Pharaoh who saw himself as a god. Remember what he asked Moses when Moses told him to let his people go.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
4:11 The fact that he cites a Hollywood movie when talking about this stuff is...troubling. For one thing, that utterly classic film is FULL of inaccuracies. For a crowd as big as the Bible describes to pass through a channel in the Sea in one night as the Bible says, that path had to be MUCH much wider. It's possible someone in the middle of the crowd wouldn't have been able to see the walls of water. The Bible also says the Pillar of Fire was darkness on the side of the Egyptians. To David Rohl's point, it's possible Pharaoh and his army DIDN'T see the walls of water, only this open channel as the Pillar of Fire and Cloud lured them into the Sea and vanishing at a point where it was too late to turn back. Jehovah told Moses he would 'get glory by means of Pharaoh and the Egyptian army', so even if they could see the miraculous state of the parted Sea, it was perhaps from God that they were hellbent on pursuing the Israelites into it.
Praying for the peace of Jerusalem: “May they prosper who love you. ◄ Psalm 122:6 There will be peace when the Prince of Peace comes. Isaiah 9:6-7 6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
this conversation divides between those who will let scripture speak plainly, and those who WILL NOT the latter i regard as utterly dishonest, carping nonentities who enshrine their own prejudice as the truth and will NOT consider anything that counters it. THEY will get their day in court when they try to convince the Holy and Terrible that his account was poetry or fiction. and best of luck to them!!!
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
I watched the red sea II film all i can say is wow The evidence of chariot parts tell me the gZulf of Aqaba was the point. Unfortunately there is still dispute as to the right answer.
You bet there is: The chronology of an Aqaba Gulf crossing contradicts the Bible's, which says the crossing happened after 7 days (minus a Sabbath) of travel. To acheive this, a horde of (more or less) 2 millions beings, including the elderly (Moses himself was around 80), the pregnant women and the cart-pulling oxen, would have walked 58 miles a day to get there, whereas the Pharaoh's army could only achieve 15 miles a day.
Absolutely NO evidence of any genuine chariot parts in the Gulf of Aqaba. If there was any evidence for this most archaeologists in the world would love to have their names go down in history as the discoverer of such a sensational find. That wuld be a crowning legacy for any archaeologist. Yet, there are no archaeologists trying to get permits to excavate this area, because they all know nothing is actually there. Besides the scriptures pretty much eliminates the Gulf of Aqaba are the site of the "Red Sea" Crossing. Anyone who studies the Scriptures diligently is aware of this. Those who are not aware of this are probably not spending much time deeply studying the Scriptures. Be Well, DZ
Yes, wrongful pride, or arrogance, is something God hates. He cannot work with people whose minds are filled with their own ideas and standards. They simply will not accept correct teaching or correction or indeed disciplining. 🤷♂
God didn't write nor said anything to anyone. The Bible was written by mere failible men "inspired" by God (yeah, right). God uses natural science to express himself.
Excellent reveal ~ NT Greek over looked by English translation of Luke 9:30-31. Key word G1841, ἔξοδος. Jesus’ exodus (an exit, figuratively death: departing), which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem. Luke 12:49-52, “I have come to cast fire (literally send lightning) upon the earth (on specific occupants); and how I [desire] it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is [τελέω]! Very soon.
@Silverheart1956 The Bible says they went out of Egypt by the way of the wilderness, as opposed to the way of the sea. If you look at a map of the sinai peninsula, there's an ancient trade route that went from Egypt toward Israel near the Mediterranean sea. The other runs across roughly the middle of the peninsula. Roughly from the northern top of the red sea over to the northern top of the gulf of aqaba.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
Dear@@noahlarson1861 It sounds like we agree. Actually, there were three major eastern routes out of Egypt during the Late Bronze Age. 1. The Way(s) of Horus was an active active route out of Egypt eastwards, that followed the Mediterranean coast to the Levant and the land of the Philistines and continued up the coast. 2. There was the Trans-sinaitic trade route that left the Nile delta going eastward through the Wady Tumeilat and past the Isthmus of Suez (the border of Egypt proper) and across the Sinai Peninsula towards the northern tip of the Gulf of Aqaba and then northward through present day Jordan. Some scholars suspect this is the route the Israelites used leaving Egypt. 3. A route leaving Memphis (farther south than the route leaving the delta), and going east across the Isthmus of Suez border area into the Sinai Peninsula, Then traveling in a south eastern direction until it joins with the Trans-sinaitic trade route. One branch off this route led to the turquoise mines at Serabit el-Khadim. The Israelites were told not to use route # 1. They started leaving Egypt probably using route # 2 going down the Wady Tumeilat. The location of Succoth (the first camp after leaving "Rameses" [Avaris]) is believed to be along the Wady Tumeilat. They next continued along route # 2. to Etham. There they were told to change direction. We are not sure if they turned north or south. If they turned North, then the sea they crossed was probably one of the lakes along the Isthmus of Suez and they probably left Egypt (roughly) by way of route # 2, to go to Mt. Sinai. If they turned South, then the sea they crossed was probably one of the southern lakes along the isthmus of Suez, .... or .... the northern portion of the Gulf of Suez, then they probably left Egypt (roughly) by way of route # 3, to go to Mt. Sinai. There are theories concerning each of these scenarios. Be Well, DZ,
The guy that mentioned the water being up to David’s (I believe) neck is just not correct. Water being up to your neck implies you can’t touch, not that it’s the exact height to cover your torso. Also, if the water is only deep enough to go up to a person’s next while standing in the bottom, how would that be impassable by Israel or deadly to the Egyptians? It doesn’t make any sense.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
6:19 Why does it have to be Aqaba? If you're arguing between Lake Ballah and Aqaba, Why leave The Gulf of Suez out of the discussion? I think maybe only once someone in these videos have mentioned that possibility. It's oddly missing.
Dear @Bimfirestarter The lakes along the Isthmus of Suez are valid, legitimate possibilities. The Gulf of Aqaba is not a possibility because the Scriptures eliminate it as a proposed location. However I still consider the northern portion of the Gulf of Suez and a valid, possibility. It is an old theory, but still has merit. Be Well, DZ
Dear@@krakoosh1 , You are probably right ! They have two major problems in the video series. 1. A lack of sound scholarship. I realize some people are impressed with the research presented in the video, but many, and probably most, scholars are not impressed. Their standards of scholarship are set higher than that portrayed in the video. I think the scholarship behind the video is shallow, but many people cannot see that because they do not have a good understanding of the pros and cons of the various theories. 2. A lack of sound Biblical literacy. Their understanding of the relevant Scriptures that address the issues is rather limited. There appears to be a lot of "cherry picking" with the Scriptures, to find portions of Scripture to fit their theories, while ignoring other relevant passages maybe you saw the little check list they distributed to check off the criteria fro the location of Mt. Sinai. Wow ! They selected specific criteria that fits a particular outcome, in essence guiding you to chose the criteria they selected and only presenting the criteria they presented in the video. Hows that for objectivity and intellectual honesty ? Be Well, DZ
@@Silverheart1956 Very well said and yes, I have noticed the rather narrow parameters of such checklists and the fallacy of the 'Egyptian vs Hebrew' approach.
Dear@@Bimfirestarter , Hello ! Oh yes ! You nailed that ! The "Egyptian model" vs the "Hebrew Model" approach. They have set up a false dichotomy, The Hebrews are good and the Egyptians are bad so the Hebrew Model must be the one that is correct. However, the Egyptians never offer a model, so they tell me the Egyptian Model has the crossing in Egypt and the Hebrews say they crossed the Gulf of Aqaba. But shouldn't they call that the Saudi Model verses the Egyptian Model, if they are focusing on location. I have talked with people who focus on these two models and I told them someone has set this up in a way that oversimplifies your choices by excluding viable alternatives, and offers only two choices, when it is actually more complicated than that. It is a shallow perspective. I told them I reject both of those Models and opt for the Biblical/Rational Model. They told me they have never heard of that one. OK, yeah, I made that up, but it does top the word/true appeal of the "Hebrew Model", and there is a model that leans more on Scripture and rational, so the model title has stuck with me. I responded by saying, Well, why have you made a conclusion without first considering all the major points of evidence ? Sounds like you need to conduct more research before you come to a conclusion. It is good to know there are people out there who are not so naive and can see through the superficiality of the information that is being offered. Thanks for you wise words and encouragement. Be Well, DZ
The Word of the LORD is truth. The Red Sea crossing is depth. Not shallow. Moses meant what he said. We are not dealing with a puddle of water. But a mass body of water. Then look at the proof of the burnt ground, coal reef and so on at the gulf of Aqaba.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
I really respect the contribution Rohl has made to this series, but his argument is very speculative. He can’t know what the Pharaoh would have done. I’ve always thought, since I was a kid, that the Pharaoh was just arrogant and blood thirsty. Besides, you could also say that shallow water would not have been intimidating because it would likely not have killed them. So it was deadly. Taking away the factor of intimidation also removes the possibility of it being very (or certainly) deadly. It’s speculative because you can’t know what pharaoh would have thought. And it doesn’t stack up even as a speculation.
Dear @phileoness, Let's say there was a wall of water on each side. A wall of water, say like the walls of Jericho (an interesting comparison). From the archaeological excavations at Tell es-Sultan, City IV (the city Joshua conquered), we know the stone retaining wall of Jericho was about 12-15 ft high and the mud brick wall on top was 20-26 ft high. This makes the height of Jericho's walls 32 to 41 ft tall. This is basically the height of a 3 to 4 story building. There are buildings this tall on either side of the street in the city I live in, so I can go walking down the street with 3 to 4 story buildings on each side of me. If I look up at them on either side of main street and imagine they were not buildings, but walls of water, it can be somewhat intimidating. It is kind of scary. Would 30 to 40 ft. of water be deep ? When I imagine these buildings, are walls of water and I am walking between them, it does indeed appear to be deep. Could soldiers on chariots be drowned if these "walls of water (30 to 40 ft. tall)" were to suddenly collapse ? Emphatically YES !! No Problem There ! It is significant to know that some of the large lakes along the Isthmus of Suez during Late Bronze Age, were that deep and some of them does fit the description in the text. So from the archaeogeological evidence many of these lakes were not to be thought of as "shallow waters". Depth is a subjective description, and depth can be used as hyperbole and have spiritual symbolic meanings. I don't see the discussion on depth anywhere near as important as how long the distance from shore to shore is. Consider that a particular number of chariots (six hundred chosen chariots - Ex. 14:7) have to fit within the parted sea for the water to close on all of them and drown them. Two considerations here. How long from shore to shore, and how wide ? The Pharaoh I think it is reasonable to assume that the Pharaoh was quick to send his chariots into the parted sea because of the intensity of his anger. His anger is evidence in his decision to pursue the Israelites. He was aware and familiar with the border Lakes and walls of water as described above, would not have looked as intimidating from the shore as they would when you were down there between them. Yet, I think is is reasonable to assume that he himself was reluctant to commit himself personally, to go between the walls of water. He had witnessed the plagues and the death of his son, so it is reasonable that he was hesitant and chose to stay as a precautionary measure. That caution for his own well being probably played into his decisions. But his troops had no choice but to follow the Pharaoh's orders I think the movie (The Ten Commandments) got that right that Pharaoh stood on the shore and ordered his army to pursue. He watched his army get crushed and drowned. Be Well, DZ
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
If God... then the miraculous description is perfectly acceptable. If you are trying to argue that the description can't be accurate, then you are denying God... So, it's really NOT about the Exodus at all, is it?!?
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
The original name of Nuwieba on Egyptian maps is Nuweiba al Mussiah. "Open water Moses" or "Moses Open (the) water". It has predictably in this silly atheistic world been shortened to Nuweiba.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Friedman using his vivid imagination again..."God 'took a bullet', arrows for the Israelites." Is God that small that he's hurt by an arrow, Friedman? 🤣😒
Think logically: Three days travel to the Red Sea crossing 15th,16th,17th Abib. 18th Abib weekly Sabbath taken out of the Egyptian pit through the Red Sea and celebrating on the opposite shore. 19th, 20th, 21st and arriving during 22nd Abib at the bitter waters of Marah. Note the 3 day - 4th day pattern ! The three day distance they travelled before the crossing, should be three quarters of the four day distance they travelled after the crossing to get to Marah. This should help eliminate incorrect proposed Red Sea crossing points. The north end of the Gulf of Suez is still the most likely crossing point - possibly in the area that is now dried up, since the Gulf of Suez is proven to have extended much further north in antiquity. i.e. travelling 9 days distance in three days to get to the crossing, and then travelling 4 days distance in 4 days to Marah after the crossing, doesn't make sense. The same applies to other proposed crossing sites ! On the first day of the 15th they left soon after midnight and travelled to Succoth, giving a maximum of 18 hours travel. They must have rested overnight after 18 hours travel. The second afternoon they "encamped" in Etham. The third afternoon they got to Pihahiroth where the crossing took place. The Straits of Tiran are about 500 kilometers from Rameses - it just can't be done ! It's about 400km to the top of the Gulf of Aqaba, which is just as unlikely a three day journey for a multitude of men, women and children with herds of livestock. So the whole Gulf of Aqaba is ruled out, leaving only the top of the Gulf of Suez as the likely site - probably the dry bed of the sea that is proven to have extended further north in antiquity. . . .
I originally looked at a a promising site that is also possibly within the THREE day range to a crossing point. It is at Adabiya, with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to Scanour Resort - on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The only incredulous thing to me is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense. As I said, according to THAT, the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?????
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
Imagine just how insulting it would be to hear someone else reinterpret history as anything but... (you get the point). Example: The Twin Towers collapsing... Nope, it was only one tower, and it was no taller than three stories, and it was only two twin brothers who died (hence the "Twin Towers" confusion), and it was due to a natural earthquake. But the story was rewritten so grandly as it's commonly known just to make those innocent Saudi princes look bad. And oh yeah... All those video recordings of the "incident" were all CGI/AI and all those "victims" were actually crisis actors. Just imagine how insulting that would be to hear... 👈👀
I get so sick off these milquetoast academics and their assinine excuses, "Well, just because it says that in the Bible doesn't mean it's literal". Um, yes, that's exactly what it means. If Moses had meant something else he would've written something else. There's no problem understanding the text here, the issue is these fools don't want to accept that the Bible might be the inerrant Word of God, because if that's true then there's a God they have to answer to after they die, and they don't want to have to think about that. Put other ancient texts in front of them and they accept then at face value, but oh no, the Bible can't be true. That's all the proof you need to know it's true, because they don't make these same kind of inane and moronic arguments about the Koran or the Bhagavad Gita because it doesn't convict their behavior and actions, but the Bible plainly explains the differences between right & wrong, and they don't want to hear that.
Straits of Tiran?😂😂😂Advocates of this please explain how they got down a 200'precipitous soaking wet drop covered in razor sharp coral in a few hours then up the same on the other side. Did they have cranes for the thousands of sheep goats and donkeys? 🙃
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
That was the basis for the crossing scene in Exodus: Gods & Kings, a scene that could have been soooo much better had they stuck to the Biblical description of the events
What's even more amazing that they walked on dry land. God presented himself in a burning bush that was not consumed! He walked on water and calmed a raging sea in an instant. We must not limit the living God of everything to fit our limited minds and body. In Jesus mighty name amen.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore. According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf. This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site. The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point. If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question. From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours. Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours. From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours: Giving 42 hours in total. Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ? Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Trying to break down the physical characteristics of an allegorical fable is like wondering how cold the water in which Captain America's plane crashed would need to be in order to keep him frozen in suspended animation for 70 years.
@@christopherogundare6049 What, the wheels? The pillars? The blackened mountain, the split rock? It's quite cinematic but there never was any evidences at Nuweiba - only theories in a vaccuum. If you find an old sword rusting in a lake in England, it doesn't mean that it's Excalibur.
@@Jlius I don't follow. You didn't ask me anything so what explanation are you waiting for? Now, I asked you a question and so I am still waiting for that answer if you will oblige me.
Note how in verse 3 the Ruach Elohim says there's a true Elohim. Which means there's false Elohim. Spoiler Alert: The false Elohim is Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2. 2 Chronicles 15: 1-7 Names of God Bible 15 The Ruach Elohim came to Azariah, son of Oded. 2 Azariah went to Asa and said to him, “Listen to me, Asa and all you men from Judah and Benjamin. Yahweh is with you when you are with him. If you will dedicate your lives to serving him, he will accept you. But if you abandon him, he will abandon you. 3 For a long time Israel was without the true Elohim, without a priest who taught correctly, and without Moses’ Teachings. 4 But when they were in trouble, they turned to Yahweh Elohim of Israel. When they searched for him, he let them find him. 5 At those times no one could come and go in peace, because everyone living in the land had a lot of turmoil. 6 One nation crushed another nation; one city crushed another. Elohim had tormented them with every kind of trouble. 7 But you must remain strong and not become discouraged. Your actions will be rewarded.”
Theology comes from combining two Greek words: theos, meaning God, and logos, meaning word or rational thought. [The Word is Elohim from Genesis 1] (not to be confused with Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2) Compare John 1: 1-5 with Genesis 1: 1-5: John 1: 1-5 Names of God Bible The Word Becomes Human 1 In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was already with God in the beginning. 3 Everything came into existence through him. Not one thing that exists was made without him. 4 He was the source of life, and that life was the light for humanity. 5 The light shines in the dark, and the dark has never extinguished it. Genesis 1: 1-5 Names of God Bible The Creation 1 In the beginning Elohim created heaven and earth. 2 The earth was formless and empty, and darkness covered the deep water. The Ruach Elohim was hovering over the water. 3 Then Elohim said, “Let there be light!” So there was light. 4 Elohim saw the light was good. So Elohim separated the light from the darkness. 5 Elohim named the light day, and the darkness he named night. There was evening, then morning-the first day.
[Yahweh Elohim "LORD God", false Elohim from Genesis 2, accepts a child sacrifice]: (not to be confused with Elohim "God" or Ruach Elohim "Spirit of God" from Genesis 1) Judges 11 Names of God Bible Jephthah’s Vow 29 Then the Ruach Yahweh came over Jephthah. Jephthah went through Gilead, Manasseh, and Mizpah in Gilead to gather an army. From Mizpah in Gilead Jephthah went to attack Ammon. 30 Jephthah made a vow to Yahweh. He said, “If you will really hand Ammon over to me, 31 then whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return safely from Ammon will belong to Yahweh. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.” 32 So Jephthah went to fight against Ammon. Yahweh handed the people of Ammon over to him. 33 He defeated them from Aroer to Minnith and on to Abel Keramim, 20 cities in all. It was a decisive defeat. So the Ammonites were crushed by the people of Israel. 34 When Jephthah went to his home in Mizpah, he saw his daughter coming out to meet him. She was dancing with tambourines in her hands. She was his only child. Jephthah had no other sons or daughters. 35 When he saw her, he tore his clothes in grief and said, “Oh no, Daughter! You’ve brought me to my knees! What disaster you’ve brought me! I made a foolish promise to Yahweh. Now I can’t break it.” 36 She said to him, “Father, you made a promise to Yahweh. Do to me whatever you promised since Yahweh has punished your enemy Ammon.” 37 Then she said to her father, “Do me a favor. Give me two months for my friends and me to walk in the mountains and mourn that I will never have an opportunity to get married.” 38 “Go!” he said, and he sent her off for two months. She and her friends went to the mountains, and she cried about never being able to get married. 39 At the end of those two months she came back to her father. He did to her what he had vowed, and she never had a husband. So the custom began in Israel 40 that for four days every year the girls in Israel would go out to sing the praises of the daughter of Jephthah, the man from Gilead.
(1) The LORD = BAAL: 2 Samuel 5: 20 Names of God Bible 20 So David went to Baal Perazim and defeated the Philistines there. He said, “Yahweh has overwhelmed my enemies in front of me like an overwhelming flood.” That is why that place is called Baal Perazim [The LORD Overwhelms]. (2) The anger of the Yahweh = Satan: Compare the following two verses: [2 Samuel 24: 1] Again the anger of the Yahweh burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.” and [1 Chronicles 21:1] Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel. (3) Israelites and Canaanites are friends, relatives and neighbors: In Exodus 12:40 the Masoretic text reads: “The length of the time the Israelites lived in Egypt was 430 years,” a sentence that has created massive chronological problems for Jewish historians, since there is no way to make the genealogies last that long. In the Samaritan version, however, the text reads: “The length of time the Israelites lived in Canaan and in Egypt was 430 years.” (4) Baals and asherahs (Lords and ladies in English) are gods/goddesses and the Baal Cycle takes place in heaven. You should read it. That's when Yahweh Elohim (false Elohim) from Genesis 2 got kicked out of heaven (off heavenly Mt Saphon): Judges 3 Names of God Bible 7 The people of Israel did what Yahweh considered evil. They forgot Yahweh their Elohim and served other gods and goddesses-the Baals and the asherahs. 1 Samuel 31 Names of God Bible 10 They put his armor in the temple of their goddesses-the asherahs-and fastened his corpse to the wall of Beth Shan. 2 Chronicles 34: 4 Names of God Bible 4 He had the altars of the various Baal gods torn down. He cut down the incense altars that were above them. He destroyed the Asherah poles, carved idols, and metal idols. He ground them into powder and scattered the powder over the tombs of those who had sacrificed to them.
The Bible is about the sons of God. If you read or were told that Genesis 1 is God (El) that's...not wrong... but still has been altered/changed from the original Word which is Elohim. It's incredibly important that nobody alter or change scriptures so the meaning is not lost. For millenia before the Old Testament the word Elohim always and only meant "sons of El". In the beginning Elohim created heaven and earth...(is what you should see in your Bibles if they cared about Truth). Use the NOG translation it's on most any Bible website. Uncensored. Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2 was adopted into the Bronze Age pantheon of Israel (Canaan) from the broader Levantine polytheism. That's the false Elohim. The main theme of the Bible is knowing Good from Evil, Holy Trinity from Unholy Trinity and Genesis 1 true Elohim from Genesis 2 false Yahweh Elohim. The clever snake in Genesis 3 knew Elohim from Yahweh Elohim...
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
I grew up thinking maybe God used natural events to cause the 10 plagues and the crossing (by a wind).
but now when reading it says God brought them out with a Mighty Hand, means He did it supernaturally and where nobody could deny God did it.
Personally I think Moshe, the Holy Spirit and Psalmist knew the difference between a lake and a sea. Psalm 106:9 He rebuked the Red sea also, and it was dried up: so he led them through the depths, as through the wilderness.
5:31 _"if you can't suffer, you can't love"_
Sounds like Manis Friedman knows that why of the Incarnation, if not the that.
You have to have a channel of water long and wide enough to hold the entire Egyptian army (250,000 plus chariots and horses) in battle formation and a wall of water deep enough so that NOT ONE of them escapes. Nuweiba Beach at the Gulf of Aqaba is the only site I know of which can accomplish that event.
The text in Hebrew is written in a way that shows the water stacked up in words. In the text itself, the words written showing a physical picture, tell exactly that story. Deep water and they passed thru as if thru walls of water.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
As a researcher and engineer I personally think the answer lies is how WIDE the path was. I think it was at least 5-6000 yards WIDE..maybe more.
So, lost in perspective was the RISK. Thus, Pharoah's army was "not afraid", they were too distant from the WALL of water to realize the depth and height of the waters.
@@rlu1956 good point, but maybe much less because it was after sunset and in seemingly poor, albeit supernatural lighting.....???
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Proving the Exodus Gulf of Suez side Reed Sea Crossing:
FIRST DAY
“And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand (“from Rameses”) in the sight of all the Egyptians.” (Numbers 33:3)
For THREE DAYS they travelled into the wilderness, well within reach of
Pharaoh’s army:
The 15th Abib therefore was not then and is not now a weekly Sabbath day.
The 15th Abib they all travelled and camped at Succoth (see Exodus 12:37).
SECOND DAY
The 16th Abib they travelled again until afternoon and camped at Etham (see Exodus 13:20).
THIRD DAY
The 17th Abib Yahweh instructed them to turn away from exiting Egypt and to travel further down the within Egypt proper and camp at Pihahiroth (see Exodus 14:2) - against the body of water that Yahweh parted for them after sunset starting the 4th day.
Only now Pharaoh thought that they had intended to actually try and escape Egypt, but had somehow made a wrong turn (see Exodus 14:3-9).
Leaving Egypt was never on Pharaoh’s agenda !
"Entangled" here between the desert mountains and the sea, Pharaoh’s spies told him the Israelites were trapped and he personally lead his army in to guarantee their return to bondage.
END OF THREE DAYS TRAVEL
Starting the 4th day 18th Abib NIGHT Yahweh parted the Red Sea and the
Israelites passed through safely.
There is a THREE DAY - FOURTH DAY pattern here:
Three days creation without light upon the earth - light "upon the earth" given on the fourth day.
Three days in the dark tomb/belly of the earth - resurrection starting the fourth day etc. and other 3x - 4x occurrences in the Bible.
Yahweh instructed Moses to turn away from their course and to travel towards Pihahiroth - where they were soon cornered between the mountains and the sea that Yahweh parted.
Unfortunately every different theorist places Pihahiroth where it suits his crossing point, without any proof to back it up.
That Jewish guy talking about God being able to suffer for us “by taking in the arrows” as well as loving us sounds exactly like the Christian belief that God “the Son” came down to take on sinless human flesh to suffer for us in our place on the cross and take on our death/sin/punishment so that those who believe shall inherit His righteousness that we may be perfect in the sight of God on judgement day! That we may enter into the eternal Kingdom of God Almighty to reign with God forever! I pray you believe in the Christ who died for us, who also rose from the dead for us that we may rise from the dead on the last day in righteousness! Glory to God Almighty!
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
When we look at old texts, we need to also look at in which way others wrote at that time. And the further back we go, the more HEROIC stories, less objective and scientific they were.
In Egypt the Pharao was ALONE on the battlefield and slew 300 men... the point was not to give an objective description of the event, but describe the main persons greatness.
Same should be expected of the texts, where Moses takes the Israelites out of Egypt.... it is not an objective, detailed accurate description, but a story to tell how great Moses was who led them out.
Those who study their Bible will not have a hard time with this answer. Those who try to shoe horn in a shallow crossing theory are simply wanting to dismiss the miracles of God and explain it by their "science". They've tried the same dog and pony show with the plagues of Egypt. Don't fall for it. Make them explains ALL of the miraculous events. Not just a few. They can't.
Those who study the Bible are fucking stupid. Full stop.
The most miraculous event is CREATION ITSELF!! The deniers have been chasing their tales about that since the first addlepated human denied Divine Creation.
Another thins is this: Could you walk through a 4 or 5 story high set of waves on either side and not get scared half to death that this is going to crash on you? I doubt the Israelites could do that without freaking out even before they entered such a funnel.
Those who deny God's ability to do miracles remind us all that haters have to hate. 😮
Why is it that 'miracles' of that magnitude are only possible in ancient times?
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
And the stupid always have to stupid. Believers in god are outright idiots.
I think I agree with Professor Rohl, only I think that the situation was not a division on both sides, but on one side, like the tide going out of the waters and a long tide, then a large tidal wave coming in. We are assuming that Moses and his people were well on their way across said waters when Pharoah decided to take the same crossing to pursuit. Nobody in their right mind, a king or a general, would send an army into the water to be drowned, so something else must have happened and suddenly.
I used google earth to check water depths . To me there is a possibility that you are missing a third option , i.e., the north end of the Gulf of Suez ! It is about 200 feet deep !
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
A 10 meter wave is very impressive and deadly, as the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami proves (250k+ dead)
Again with the Nuweiba Beach crossing. The biggest Miracle with that is the entire deserts of Shur and Etham had to be carried on eagles' wings to Midian.
The report on Canaanite cities.
DT 1:28 Where can we go up? Our brothers have made our hearts melt, by saying, “The people are bigger and taller than we; the cities are large and fortified up to heaven.
Goodness, the cities are fortified up to HEAVEN. They didn't exaggerate height one bit.
Then there is the physics. A wind does not blow water at right angles to its direction.
It's called a MIRACLE for a reason...
@@research903 It's called a hoax.
But you have to accept something else: That Moses wrote the first 5 books of the bible called the Torah. That is highly debated among scholars. Because if he did not write it then that opens another debate about when it was written down in its final form.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
6:00 min: James Hoffmeier: "I think one has to be very careful when taking the poetics of the prophets or... the book of psalms and reading literal readings back into the texts of Exodus 14 and 15." True... only the poems use language of great depth. Nonetheless this water-body was deep enough to drown in.
Which would still be either. Gulf of suez is up to 230’ and gulf of Aqaba is up to 6100’ deep. Gulf of Aqaba requires them to walk down through a trench over a mile deep then back up it. Where as the gulf of suez is relatively flat. Gulf of suez seems more plausible without more investigation into it than I’ve done
@@krakoosh1No it does NOT, there is a literal land-bridge IN the gulf of Aqaba at Nuiweba beach. Exactly where the crossing occurred. And actually READ Exodus. There was nowhere to go they had just come through a valley with high cliff walls on both sides. Which is exactly what you find at Nuiweba beach. It is a literal fit to a T. Everything about that location. They’ve done the dives and they’ve found the remains. Spoked wheels that had a number of spokes ONLY used in the chariots of the 18th dynasty. Which was the current dynasty at the time of the exodus under Amenhotep II. The “young & arrogant” pharaoh that came along. The one who then crawled back to Egypt with his tail between his legs in defeat. He was not drowned in the sea with his army.
I can also drop a lot of artifacts overboard in the Gulf of Aqaba, return two years later when they are full of barnacles and call it 'evidence' - that proves nothing !
Has this 'evidence' been examined and verified by experts ? NO !
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Will this episode of the POE series be available in a streaming platform soon? I missed the opportunity to see it in the theaters.
It has been available for a couple of months now.
@@ToddSauve Where are you finding it? I've checked a few sources who stream past POE content but not this particular series.
@@FreeBird_6791 It is in the Store section of the POE website.
I like to think of the Egyptians drowning in 1 inch of water! What a miracle that would be!!!!!
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
What sets the context is the distance. How far AWAY were the "walls of water"?
The further away, the deeper they might be, but look more shallow and less fearful than close or near by.
The TEXTS do not tell us that.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
@@Michael-pn5lp You make some interesting points and I enjoyed reading them.
A few things are against us finding this place.
1. 3000 years of geological changes.
2. Lack of clarity in depth of water, width of opening, and length of path through the waters.
3. Multiple paths that fit the exodus.
Everything documented by Moses happened and is true. I believe 100% the story (Luke 24.44).
It could be that the miracle is BIGGER than we realize. By that I mean the width of the opening might have been WIDER than we think naturally. IF the width is wider than we think, the depth of the Red Sea as a problem goes away. IF the water is far away, ti would simply look like a wall in the distance.
Nuweiba would fit perfectly if we assume the WIDTH of the path was miles wide, not a narrow trail.
Being tremendously WIDE would make people feel SAFER, and the Egyptian armies more bold to follow.
@@rlu1956 The Great Bitter Lake is also bordered on the west side by desert and mountains 150-200 meters high, and the Gulf of Suez possibly extended into this lake - I no longer have the evidence of it's ancient shoreline. So this scenario is definitely within the THREE day travel limit to the crossing point.
@@rlu1956 Moses did have faith in Yahweh, but he was not privy to all Yahweh's intentions, neither were Pharaoh or his people. Moses only relayed Yahweh's instructions to the Israelites or to Pharaoh as pertinent. Moses knew no better, but as Paul said he had Faith.
Moses had repeatedly asked Pharaoh to let the Israelites journey three days into the wilderness: to sacrifice to Yahweh (see Exodus 3:18; 5:3; 8:27).
The intention, request and understanding was that they would actually return to Pharaoh when they were finished, which is why Pharaoh was going to allow only the men to go at first (see Exodus 10:8- 11).
After more plagues Pharaoh was going to allow them all to go, but the herds and flocks were to remain behind, as they were all going to return (see Exodus 10:24-26).
Moses demanded all the flocks and herds to go as well, because he didn't know exactly what sacrifice Yahweh required, yet they were never meant to permanently leave Pharaoh (see Exodus 8:28).
Yahweh hardened Pharaoh’s heart and only after the 10th plague on the night of the Passover, did he finally give his consent.
Only now Pharaoh relented to all demands, after his own firstborn son was dead, as Yahweh and Moses had originally warned him ! (see Exodus 12:30-33). Pharaoh now actually ordered them to: “go, serve Yahweh, as ye have said. Also take your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone; and bless me also.” i.e. all travel three days into the wilderness with flocks and herds to sacrifice to Yahweh “as ye have said”, bless Pharaoh as well - and return again afterwards !
In the early hours of this morning, after starting the three day trek into the Egyptian wilderness at night before sunrise, the Israelites passed by at dawn in sight of all Egypt burying their firstborn. The Egyptians had already gladly lent the Israelites their prized jewelry and possessions to appease their God (Exodus 12:35-36), but stubborn Pharaoh had brought on this final tenth plague, killing all their firstborn - just as Pharaoh had killed the newborn male Israelites at Moses’ birth !
The whole of Egypt was party to and profited from Pharaoh’s crimes !
This was no “day of gladness” - just yet !
This was a somber procession !
“And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand (“from Rameses”) in the sight of all the Egyptians.” (Numbers 33:3)
For THREE DAYS they travelled into the wilderness, well within reach of
Pharaoh’s army:
The 15th Abib therefore was not then and is not now a weekly Sabbath day.
1st day
2nd day
3rd day
The 15th Abib they all travelled and camped at Succoth (see Exodus 12:37).
The 16th Abib they travelled again until afternoon and camped at Etham (see Exodus 13:20). The 17th Abib Yahweh instructed them to turn away from exiting Egypt eastwards above the top end of the Red Sea (Gulf of Suez), and to travel further down the west side within Egypt and camp at Pihahiroth (see Exodus 14:2). Only now Pharaoh thought that they were going to actually try and escape Egypt, but had somehow made a wrong turn (see Exodus 14:3-9).
Leaving Egypt was never on Pharaoh’s agenda !
Enclosed here between the desert mountains and the sea, Pharaoh’s spies told him the Israelites were trapped and he personally lead his army in to guarantee their return to bondage.
Starting the 4th day 18th Abib NIGHT Yahweh parted the Red Sea and the
Israelites passed through safely:
“And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them:” (Exodus 14:19).
This “angel of God” was Christ Himself:
“Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink:
for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them:
and that Rock was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:1-4).
He is our Shepherd - the Stone of Israel - see Genesis 49:24 !
“And Moses STRECHED FORTH HIS HAND OVER THE SEA, and the sea
returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled against it; and Yahweh overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea. And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them.
But the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.
THUS Yahweh saved Israel THAT DAY out of the hand of the Egyptians;
and Israel saw the Egyptians dead¡ upon the sea shore. And Israel saw that great work which Yahweh did upon the Egyptians:
and the people feared Yahweh, and believed Yahweh, and his servant Moses” (Exodus 14:27-31).
@@Michael-pn5lp I am not SOLD on any view yet, per se. 3000 years of topical changes in the region might be the road block keeping us from ever really discovering the site.
The Bible is clear, the WALLS of water were significant. The TERROR of the miracle was real, the judgement brought upon EGYPT significant.
The returning of the waters wiped out Egypt's army present...not one survived.
So, as you study the biblical references to the great miracle, remember word for word what Moses wrote through the Spirit.
The walls of water...were HUGE...killers of thousands.
I THOUGHT IT WAS A PILLAR OF FIRE!!!!!!!
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Fire at night for light and warmth
A Column of smoke during the day…. providing shade….
It means what it says: walls of water!!!
Woods says this other location would take a miracle, but the degree of miracle matters too. To meet the lowest threshold of needing a miracle-how low do you go? And how far do you stretch the language. Would it be a miracle if the knee deep water was just really muddy so no one could cross. A big wind came, and dried it out so that it was passable. But the wind died down and the Egyptians got stuck in the mud and eventually died of dehydration. Maybe they didn’t even really die, and that was poetic too. They just didn’t want to get their feet wet so they went out a little way but turned back as the water slowly trickled back in. After all, the crashing down of the water is just poetic. That would have been a miracle, right?
If all these guys are looking for is the best explanation with mostly natural causes or just natural cause and impeccable timing, I think they’re missing the point.
I agree with that outlook. There is more than one way to see the miracle of the crossing in Exodus. There is no way in the world the General or the King would have sent his entire host of soldiers on horses and chariots into the sea to simply be destroyed. That is simply nuts.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
OK, Let's say there was a wall of water on each side. A wall of water, say like, ... the walls of Jericho (an interesting comparison).
From the archaeological excavations at Tell es-Sultan, City IV (the city Joshua conquered), we know the stone retaining wall of Jericho was about 12-15 ft high and the mud brick wall on top was 20-26 ft high. This makes the height of Jericho's walls 32 to 41 ft tall.
This is basically the height of a 3 to 4 story building. There are buildings this tall on either side of the street in the city I live in, so I can go walking down the street with 3 to 4 story buildings on each side of me.
If I look up at them on either side of main street and imagine they were not buildings, but walls of water, it can be somewhat intimidating. It is kind of scary. Would 30 to 40 ft. of water be deep ? When I imagine these buildings, are walls of water and I am walking between them, it does indeed appear to be deep.
Could soldiers on chariots be drowned if these "walls of water (30 to 40 ft. tall)" were to suddenly collapse ? Emphatically YES !! No Problem There !
It is significant to know that some of the large lakes along the Isthmus of Suez during Late Bronze Age, were that deep and some of them does fit the description in the text.
So from the archaeogeological evidence many of these lakes were not to be thought of as "shallow waters".
Depth is a subjective description, and depth can be used as hyperbole and have spiritual symbolic meanings. I don't see the discussion on depth anywhere near as important as how long the distance from shore to shore is.
Consider that a particular number of chariots (six hundred chosen chariots - Ex. 14:7) have to fit within the parted sea for the water to close on all of them and drown them. Two considerations here. How long from shore to shore, and how wide ?
Be Well, DZ
I watched this and listen to all the men talk and all I can say is in (ISAIAH CHAPTER 29 VERSE 14 SAYS THEREFORE,BEHOLD, I WILL AGAIN DO A MARVELOUS WORK AMONG THIS PEOPLE, A MARVELOUS AND WONDER;( FOR THE WISDOM OF THEIR WISE MEN SHALL PERISH, AND THE UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR PRUDENT MEN SHALL BE HIDDEN. So is this happening now with these men that are saying Moses get it all wrong and it didn't happen the way he said it did????
Everyone seems to not understand why Pharaoh's heart was hardened. He saw himself as a god. And because of that he went after Moses in the sea. In his heart who is Moses? said Pharaoh who saw himself as a god. Remember what he asked Moses when Moses told him to let his people go.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
4:11 The fact that he cites a Hollywood movie when talking about this stuff is...troubling. For one thing, that utterly classic film is FULL of inaccuracies. For a crowd as big as the Bible describes to pass through a channel in the Sea in one night as the Bible says, that path had to be MUCH much wider. It's possible someone in the middle of the crowd wouldn't have been able to see the walls of water. The Bible also says the Pillar of Fire was darkness on the side of the Egyptians. To David Rohl's point, it's possible Pharaoh and his army DIDN'T see the walls of water, only this open channel as the Pillar of Fire and Cloud lured them into the Sea and vanishing at a point where it was too late to turn back. Jehovah told Moses he would 'get glory by means of Pharaoh and the Egyptian army', so even if they could see the miraculous state of the parted Sea, it was perhaps from God that they were hellbent on pursuing the Israelites into it.
Praying for the peace of Jerusalem: “May they prosper who love you. ◄ Psalm 122:6 There will be peace when the Prince of Peace comes.
Isaiah 9:6-7 6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
... And then, amidst the rational arguments, there was this guy who stood up and recited some kind of poem, with brimstone in his eyes. It was crazy.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
this conversation divides between those who will let scripture speak plainly, and those who WILL NOT
the latter i regard as utterly dishonest, carping nonentities who enshrine their own prejudice as the truth and will NOT consider anything that counters it.
THEY will get their day in court when they try to convince the Holy and Terrible that his account was poetry or fiction.
and best of luck to them!!!
Thats pretty arrogant to say that someone's salvation depends on how they interpret this story.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
I watched the red sea II film all i can say is wow The evidence of chariot parts tell me the gZulf of Aqaba was the point. Unfortunately there is still dispute as to the right answer.
No chariot parts have been found, nor would they have any relationship to Exodus if they were.
You bet there is: The chronology of an Aqaba Gulf crossing contradicts the Bible's, which says the crossing happened after 7 days (minus a Sabbath) of travel. To acheive this, a horde of (more or less) 2 millions beings, including the elderly (Moses himself was around 80), the pregnant women and the cart-pulling oxen, would have walked 58 miles a day to get there, whereas the Pharaoh's army could only achieve 15 miles a day.
@@martinportelance138 I keep hoping someone will invent a pillar of fire force field like the Hebrews had but to date, no luck.
Absolutely NO evidence of any genuine chariot parts in the Gulf of Aqaba.
If there was any evidence for this most archaeologists in the world would love to have their names go down in history as the discoverer of such a sensational find. That wuld be a crowning legacy for any archaeologist.
Yet, there are no archaeologists trying to get permits to excavate this area, because they all know nothing is actually there.
Besides the scriptures pretty much eliminates the Gulf of Aqaba are the site of the "Red Sea" Crossing. Anyone who studies the Scriptures diligently is aware of this. Those who are not aware of this are probably not spending much time deeply studying the Scriptures.
Be Well, DZ
@@martinportelance138the crossing at Nuiweba beach ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT “contradict” a single thing in the Bible. Nice try there.
These “ scholars pride” is tangible! They simply can’t believe God.
Yes, wrongful pride, or arrogance, is something God hates. He cannot work with people whose minds are filled with their own ideas and standards. They simply will not accept correct teaching or correction or indeed disciplining. 🤷♂
Tangible means perceptible by touch, what is the meaning of your comment? These men all believe God.
The God of Moses is definitely not Christian, so maybe you don't believe him either.
@@ji8044 If you only came to make stupid arguments please go away. No one needs your type here.
God didn't write nor said anything to anyone. The Bible was written by mere failible men "inspired" by God (yeah, right).
God uses natural science to express himself.
Excellent reveal ~ NT Greek over looked by English translation of Luke 9:30-31. Key word G1841, ἔξοδος. Jesus’ exodus (an exit, figuratively death: departing), which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem. Luke 12:49-52, “I have come to cast fire (literally send lightning) upon the earth (on specific occupants); and how I [desire] it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is [τελέω]! Very soon.
Scripture states God did not want the Israelites to take the route by the sea. So, it wasn't shallow water.
That is a non sequitur. Does not make sense.
@Silverheart1956 The Bible says they went out of Egypt by the way of the wilderness, as opposed to the way of the sea. If you look at a map of the sinai peninsula, there's an ancient trade route that went from Egypt toward Israel near the Mediterranean sea. The other runs across roughly the middle of the peninsula. Roughly from the northern top of the red sea over to the northern top of the gulf of aqaba.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
Dear@@noahlarson1861
It sounds like we agree.
Actually, there were three major eastern routes out of Egypt during the Late Bronze Age.
1. The Way(s) of Horus was an active active route out of Egypt eastwards, that followed the Mediterranean coast to the Levant and the land of the Philistines and continued up the coast.
2. There was the Trans-sinaitic trade route that left the Nile delta going eastward through the Wady Tumeilat and past the Isthmus of Suez (the border of Egypt proper) and across the Sinai Peninsula towards the northern tip of the Gulf of Aqaba and then northward through present day Jordan. Some scholars suspect this is the route the Israelites used leaving Egypt.
3. A route leaving Memphis (farther south than the route leaving the delta), and going east across the Isthmus of Suez border area into the Sinai Peninsula, Then traveling in a south eastern direction until it joins with the Trans-sinaitic trade route. One branch off this route led to the turquoise mines at Serabit el-Khadim.
The Israelites were told not to use route # 1. They started leaving Egypt probably using route # 2 going down the Wady Tumeilat. The location of Succoth (the first camp after leaving "Rameses" [Avaris]) is believed to be along the Wady Tumeilat. They next continued along route # 2. to Etham. There they were told to change direction. We are not sure if they turned north or south.
If they turned North, then the sea they crossed was probably one of the lakes along the Isthmus of Suez
and they probably left Egypt (roughly) by way of route # 2, to go to Mt. Sinai.
If they turned South, then the sea they crossed was probably one of the southern lakes along the
isthmus of Suez, .... or .... the northern portion of the Gulf of Suez, then they probably left Egypt
(roughly) by way of route # 3, to go to Mt. Sinai.
There are theories concerning each of these scenarios.
Be Well,
DZ,
The Mediterranean Sea, specifically.
ישנן הקבלות רבות בין תיאור יציאת מצריים למסעו של רעמסס השני צפונה וקרב קדש . מתוארת שם טביעת הצבא החיתי בנהר בהתערבות האליל רע .
Pi hieroth isn't near Egypt.
The guy that mentioned the water being up to David’s (I believe) neck is just not correct. Water being up to your neck implies you can’t touch, not that it’s the exact height to cover your torso.
Also, if the water is only deep enough to go up to a person’s next while standing in the bottom, how would that be impassable by Israel or deadly to the Egyptians?
It doesn’t make any sense.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
6:19
Why does it have to be Aqaba? If you're arguing between Lake Ballah and Aqaba, Why leave The Gulf of Suez out of the discussion? I think maybe only once someone in these videos have mentioned that possibility. It's oddly missing.
Dear @Bimfirestarter
The lakes along the Isthmus of Suez are valid, legitimate possibilities. The Gulf of Aqaba is not a possibility because the Scriptures eliminate it as a proposed location.
However I still consider the northern portion of the Gulf of Suez and a valid, possibility. It is an old theory, but still has merit.
Be Well, DZ
They don’t mention Suez because the people behind this series are of the mindset that it is only Aqaba and nowhere else.
Dear@@krakoosh1 ,
You are probably right !
They have two major problems in the video series.
1. A lack of sound scholarship.
I realize some people are impressed with the research presented in the video, but many, and probably most, scholars are not impressed. Their standards of scholarship are set higher than that portrayed in the video. I think the scholarship behind the video is shallow, but many people cannot see that because they do not have a good understanding of the pros and cons of the various theories.
2. A lack of sound Biblical literacy.
Their understanding of the relevant Scriptures that address the issues is rather limited. There appears to be a lot of "cherry picking" with the Scriptures, to find portions of Scripture to fit their theories, while ignoring other relevant passages
maybe you saw the little check list they distributed to check off the criteria fro the location of Mt. Sinai. Wow ! They selected specific criteria that fits a particular outcome, in essence guiding you to chose the criteria they selected and only presenting the criteria they presented in the video. Hows that for objectivity and intellectual honesty ?
Be Well,
DZ
@@Silverheart1956 Very well said and yes, I have noticed the rather narrow parameters of such checklists and the fallacy of the 'Egyptian vs Hebrew' approach.
Dear@@Bimfirestarter ,
Hello ! Oh yes ! You nailed that !
The "Egyptian model" vs the "Hebrew Model" approach.
They have set up a false dichotomy,
The Hebrews are good and the Egyptians are bad so the Hebrew Model must be the one that is correct.
However, the Egyptians never offer a model, so they tell me the Egyptian Model has the crossing in Egypt and the Hebrews say they crossed the Gulf of Aqaba.
But shouldn't they call that the Saudi Model verses the Egyptian Model, if they are focusing on location.
I have talked with people who focus on these two models and I told them someone has set this up in a way that oversimplifies your choices by excluding viable alternatives, and offers only two choices, when it is actually more complicated than that. It is a shallow perspective.
I told them I reject both of those Models and opt for the Biblical/Rational Model. They told me they have never heard of that one.
OK, yeah, I made that up, but it does top the word/true appeal of the "Hebrew Model", and there is a model that leans more on Scripture and rational, so the model title has stuck with me.
I responded by saying, Well, why have you made a conclusion without first considering all the major points of evidence ? Sounds like you need to conduct more research before you come to a conclusion.
It is good to know there are people out there who are not so naive and can see through the superficiality of the information that is being offered.
Thanks for you wise words and encouragement.
Be Well, DZ
The Word of the LORD is truth. The Red Sea crossing is depth. Not shallow. Moses meant what he said. We are not dealing with a puddle of water. But a mass body of water. Then look at the proof of the burnt ground, coal reef and so on at the gulf of Aqaba.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
I really respect the contribution Rohl has made to this series, but his argument is very speculative. He can’t know what the Pharaoh would have done. I’ve always thought, since I was a kid, that the Pharaoh was just arrogant and blood thirsty.
Besides, you could also say that shallow water would not have been intimidating because it would likely not have killed them. So it was deadly. Taking away the factor of intimidation also removes the possibility of it being very (or certainly) deadly.
It’s speculative because you can’t know what pharaoh would have thought. And it doesn’t stack up even as a speculation.
Dear @phileoness,
Let's say there was a wall of water on each side. A wall of water, say like the walls of Jericho (an interesting comparison).
From the archaeological excavations at Tell es-Sultan, City IV (the city Joshua conquered), we know the stone retaining wall of Jericho was about 12-15 ft high and the mud brick wall on top was 20-26 ft high. This makes the height of Jericho's walls 32 to 41 ft tall.
This is basically the height of a 3 to 4 story building. There are buildings this tall on either side of the street in the city I live in, so I can go walking down the street with 3 to 4 story buildings on each side of me.
If I look up at them on either side of main street and imagine they were not buildings, but walls of water, it can be somewhat intimidating. It is kind of scary. Would 30 to 40 ft. of water be deep ? When I imagine these buildings, are walls of water and I am walking between them, it does indeed appear to be deep.
Could soldiers on chariots be drowned if these "walls of water (30 to 40 ft. tall)" were to suddenly collapse ? Emphatically YES !! No Problem There !
It is significant to know that some of the large lakes along the Isthmus of Suez during Late Bronze Age, were that deep and some of them does fit the description in the text.
So from the archaeogeological evidence many of these lakes were not to be thought of as "shallow waters".
Depth is a subjective description, and depth can be used as hyperbole and have spiritual symbolic meanings. I don't see the discussion on depth anywhere near as important as how long the distance from shore to shore is.
Consider that a particular number of chariots (six hundred chosen chariots - Ex. 14:7) have to fit within the parted sea for the water to close on all of them and drown them. Two considerations here. How long from shore to shore, and how wide ?
The Pharaoh
I think it is reasonable to assume that the Pharaoh was quick to send his chariots into the parted sea because of the intensity of his anger. His anger is evidence in his decision to pursue the Israelites. He was aware and familiar with the border Lakes and walls of water as described above, would not have looked as intimidating from the shore as they would when you were down there between them.
Yet, I think is is reasonable to assume that he himself was reluctant to commit himself personally, to go between the walls of water. He had witnessed the plagues and the death of his son, so it is reasonable that he was hesitant and chose to stay as a precautionary measure. That caution for his own well being probably played into his decisions. But his troops had no choice but to follow the Pharaoh's orders
I think the movie (The Ten Commandments) got that right that Pharaoh stood on the shore and ordered his army to pursue. He watched his army get crushed and drowned.
Be Well, DZ
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Mr Rohl isn't a Believer, so give him that leeway, as one coming at the issue from a secular perspective.
@@Bimfirestarter My criticism was of his reasoning. It has nothing to do with whether he’s a believer or not.
Not vertical. Heaped up. Like hills. Gravitational force of a very large cometlike body. Venus arriving.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
If God... then the miraculous description is perfectly acceptable. If you are trying to argue that the description can't be accurate, then you are denying God... So, it's really NOT about the Exodus at all, is it?!?
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
The original name of Nuwieba on Egyptian maps is Nuweiba al Mussiah. "Open water Moses" or "Moses Open (the) water". It has predictably in this silly atheistic world been shortened to Nuweiba.
Mussiah isn't Arabic for Moses. Might you be confusing it for Musa?
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
People try to put God in a box. He put a powerful desire to kill the Hebrews into Pharohs heart....who commanded his entire army into the sea....
Jewish rabbi accidently preaches the gospel. Lol
Friedman using his vivid imagination again..."God 'took a bullet', arrows for the Israelites." Is God that small that he's hurt by an arrow, Friedman? 🤣😒
Come on guys
It was one night to cross. You ain't crossing a hundred miles at night
They also prolly didn't write that song the same night
It wasn't even an entire night. It was the third watch of the night. Less than 4 hours.
Think logically:
Three days travel to the Red Sea crossing 15th,16th,17th Abib.
18th Abib weekly Sabbath taken out of the Egyptian pit through the Red Sea and celebrating on the opposite shore.
19th, 20th, 21st and arriving during 22nd Abib at the bitter waters of Marah.
Note the 3 day - 4th day pattern !
The three day distance they travelled before the crossing, should be three quarters of the four day distance they travelled after the crossing to get to Marah.
This should help eliminate incorrect proposed Red Sea crossing points.
The north end of the Gulf of Suez is still the most likely crossing point - possibly in the area that is now dried up, since the Gulf of Suez is proven to have extended much further north in antiquity.
i.e. travelling 9 days distance in three days to get to the crossing, and then travelling 4 days distance in 4 days to Marah after the crossing, doesn't make sense. The same applies to other proposed crossing sites !
On the first day of the 15th they left soon after midnight and travelled to Succoth, giving a maximum of 18 hours travel. They must have rested overnight after 18 hours travel.
The second afternoon they "encamped" in Etham.
The third afternoon they got to Pihahiroth where the crossing took place.
The Straits of Tiran are about 500 kilometers from Rameses - it just can't be done !
It's about 400km to the top of the Gulf of Aqaba, which is just as unlikely a three day journey for a multitude of men, women and children with herds of livestock. So the whole Gulf of Aqaba is ruled out, leaving only the top of the Gulf of Suez as the likely site - probably the dry bed of the sea that is proven to have extended further north in antiquity. . . .
I originally looked at a a promising site that is also possibly within the THREE day range to a crossing point.
It is at Adabiya, with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to Scanour Resort - on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The only incredulous thing to me is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense. As I said, according to THAT, the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?????
@@Michael-pn5lp 42 Yeah I do if one has a sense of humor. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,”
@@501Mobius the reference to 42 months appears seven times in the Bible !
Luckily this isn't your site, so you can't also block my posts here 😂
Yam suf
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
It was a deep sea and the so-called lakes would not serve the purpose of God
Imagine just how insulting it would be to hear someone else reinterpret history as anything but... (you get the point).
Example:
The Twin Towers collapsing...
Nope, it was only one tower, and it was no taller than three stories, and it was only two twin brothers who died (hence the "Twin Towers" confusion), and it was due to a natural earthquake.
But the story was rewritten so grandly as it's commonly known just to make those innocent Saudi princes look bad.
And oh yeah...
All those video recordings of the "incident" were all CGI/AI and all those "victims" were actually crisis actors.
Just imagine how insulting that would be to hear... 👈👀
I get so sick off these milquetoast academics and their assinine excuses, "Well, just because it says that in the Bible doesn't mean it's literal". Um, yes, that's exactly what it means. If Moses had meant something else he would've written something else. There's no problem understanding the text here, the issue is these fools don't want to accept that the Bible might be the inerrant Word of God, because if that's true then there's a God they have to answer to after they die, and they don't want to have to think about that. Put other ancient texts in front of them and they accept then at face value, but oh no, the Bible can't be true. That's all the proof you need to know it's true, because they don't make these same kind of inane and moronic arguments about the Koran or the Bhagavad Gita because it doesn't convict their behavior and actions, but the Bible plainly explains the differences between right & wrong, and they don't want to hear that.
Straits of Tiran?😂😂😂Advocates of this please explain how they got down a 200'precipitous soaking wet drop covered in razor sharp coral in a few hours then up the same on the other side. Did they have cranes for the thousands of sheep goats and donkeys? 🙃
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?.
That was the basis for the crossing scene in Exodus: Gods & Kings, a scene that could have been soooo much better had they stuck to the Biblical description of the events
What's even more amazing that they walked on dry land. God presented himself in a burning bush that was not consumed! He walked on water and calmed a raging sea in an instant. We must not limit the living God of everything to fit our limited minds and body. In Jesus mighty name amen.
A promising site that is possibly within the THREE day travel range to a Red Sea crossing point is at Adabiya - with rough 600m above sea level terrain immediately behind the shore.
According to naval charts there is a shallower diagonal NSE possible land bridge to the Scanour Resort on the opposite shore jutting into the Suez Gulf.
This possible crossing point could be within the THREE day/maximum-42-hour travel cut-off to the crossing site.
The incredulous thing is that everyone is almost deliberately overlooking the stated Biblical maximum of 42 hour travel limit to the crossing point.
If they can't stay within that limit, then their theories are nonsense, and according to THAT the whole Gulf of Aqaba is out of the question.
From midnight on the 15th Abib to 6am is 6 hours.
Then from 6am to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 16th Abib to 6pm is another 12 hours.
From 6am on the 17th to 6pm is another 12 hours:
Giving 42 hours in total.
Don't you find that number Biblically very familiar ?
Doesn't the reference to 42 months appear seven times in the Bible ?
Foolishness.
Trying to break down the physical characteristics of an allegorical fable is like wondering how cold the water in which Captain America's plane crashed would need to be in order to keep him frozen in suspended animation for 70 years.
... Or at which distance Icarus was from the sun when it melted his wings' wax.
@@martinportelance138 Oh that's very good! I may have to steal that one in the future.
I am glad you both can amuse each other. Fables with archeological evidence at Nuweiba, Egypt!!! Hmmm. Interesting choice of words
@@christopherogundare6049 What, the wheels? The pillars? The blackened mountain, the split rock? It's quite cinematic but there never was any evidences at Nuweiba - only theories in a vaccuum. If you find an old sword rusting in a lake in England, it doesn't mean that it's Excalibur.
@@christopherogundare6049 There is not one single piece of evidence of Exodus anywhere but many people make a good living telling you otherwise.
first
Shall be last
😂
It's really foolish to try to explain the Bible. We are commanded to believe the Bible and not to explain it.
Really, where does it say that?
@@blusheep2 from Genesis to Revelation.
@@Jlius Thats a dumb answer. Where exactly are we commanded just to believe and not explain it?
It never says that.
@@blusheep2 keep waiting for an explanation.
@@Jlius I don't follow. You didn't ask me anything so what explanation are you waiting for? Now, I asked you a question and so I am still waiting for that answer if you will oblige me.
Note how in verse 3 the Ruach Elohim says there's a true Elohim.
Which means there's false Elohim.
Spoiler Alert: The false Elohim is Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2.
2 Chronicles 15: 1-7
Names of God Bible
15 The Ruach Elohim came to Azariah, son of Oded. 2 Azariah went to Asa and said to him, “Listen to me, Asa and all you men from Judah and Benjamin. Yahweh is with you when you are with him. If you will dedicate your lives to serving him, he will accept you. But if you abandon him, he will abandon you. 3 For a long time Israel was without the true Elohim, without a priest who taught correctly, and without Moses’ Teachings. 4 But when they were in trouble, they turned to Yahweh Elohim of Israel. When they searched for him, he let them find him. 5 At those times no one could come and go in peace, because everyone living in the land had a lot of turmoil. 6 One nation crushed another nation; one city crushed another. Elohim had tormented them with every kind of trouble. 7 But you must remain strong and not become discouraged. Your actions will be rewarded.”
Theology comes from combining two Greek words: theos, meaning God, and logos, meaning word or rational thought.
[The Word is Elohim from Genesis 1]
(not to be confused with Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2)
Compare John 1: 1-5 with Genesis 1: 1-5:
John 1: 1-5
Names of God Bible
The Word Becomes Human
1 In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was already with God in the beginning.
3 Everything came into existence through him. Not one thing that exists was made without him.
4 He was the source of life, and that life was the light for humanity.
5 The light shines in the dark, and the dark has never extinguished it.
Genesis 1: 1-5
Names of God Bible
The Creation
1 In the beginning Elohim created heaven and earth.
2 The earth was formless and empty, and darkness covered the deep water. The Ruach Elohim was hovering over the water.
3 Then Elohim said, “Let there be light!” So there was light. 4 Elohim saw the light was good. So Elohim separated the light from the darkness. 5 Elohim named the light day, and the darkness he named night. There was evening, then morning-the first day.
[Yahweh Elohim "LORD God", false Elohim from Genesis 2, accepts a child sacrifice]:
(not to be confused with Elohim "God" or Ruach Elohim "Spirit of God" from Genesis 1)
Judges 11
Names of God Bible
Jephthah’s Vow
29 Then the Ruach Yahweh came over Jephthah. Jephthah went through Gilead, Manasseh, and Mizpah in Gilead to gather an army. From Mizpah in Gilead Jephthah went to attack Ammon.
30 Jephthah made a vow to Yahweh. He said, “If you will really hand Ammon over to me, 31 then whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return safely from Ammon will belong to Yahweh. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”
32 So Jephthah went to fight against Ammon. Yahweh handed the people of Ammon over to him. 33 He defeated them from Aroer to Minnith and on to Abel Keramim, 20 cities in all. It was a decisive defeat. So the Ammonites were crushed by the people of Israel.
34 When Jephthah went to his home in Mizpah, he saw his daughter coming out to meet him. She was dancing with tambourines in her hands. She was his only child. Jephthah had no other sons or daughters. 35 When he saw her, he tore his clothes in grief and said, “Oh no, Daughter! You’ve brought me to my knees! What disaster you’ve brought me! I made a foolish promise to Yahweh. Now I can’t break it.”
36 She said to him, “Father, you made a promise to Yahweh. Do to me whatever you promised since Yahweh has punished your enemy Ammon.” 37 Then she said to her father, “Do me a favor. Give me two months for my friends and me to walk in the mountains and mourn that I will never have an opportunity to get married.”
38 “Go!” he said, and he sent her off for two months. She and her friends went to the mountains, and she cried about never being able to get married. 39 At the end of those two months she came back to her father. He did to her what he had vowed, and she never had a husband. So the custom began in Israel 40 that for four days every year the girls in Israel would go out to sing the praises of the daughter of Jephthah, the man from Gilead.
(1) The LORD = BAAL:
2 Samuel 5: 20
Names of God Bible
20 So David went to Baal Perazim and defeated the Philistines there. He said, “Yahweh has overwhelmed my enemies in front of me like an overwhelming flood.” That is why that place is called Baal Perazim [The LORD Overwhelms].
(2) The anger of the Yahweh = Satan:
Compare the following two verses:
[2 Samuel 24: 1]
Again the anger of the Yahweh burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.”
and
[1 Chronicles 21:1]
Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel.
(3) Israelites and Canaanites are friends, relatives and neighbors:
In Exodus 12:40 the Masoretic text reads: “The length of the time the Israelites lived in Egypt was 430 years,” a sentence that has created massive chronological problems for Jewish historians, since there is no way to make the genealogies last that long. In the Samaritan version, however, the text reads: “The length of time the Israelites lived in Canaan and in Egypt was 430 years.”
(4) Baals and asherahs (Lords and ladies in English) are gods/goddesses and the Baal Cycle takes place in heaven. You should read it. That's when Yahweh Elohim (false Elohim) from Genesis 2 got kicked out of heaven (off heavenly Mt Saphon):
Judges 3
Names of God Bible
7 The people of Israel did what Yahweh considered evil. They forgot Yahweh their Elohim and served other gods and goddesses-the Baals and the asherahs.
1 Samuel 31
Names of God Bible
10 They put his armor in the temple of their goddesses-the asherahs-and fastened his corpse to the wall of Beth Shan.
2 Chronicles 34: 4
Names of God Bible
4 He had the altars of the various Baal gods torn down. He cut down the incense altars that were above them. He destroyed the Asherah poles, carved idols, and metal idols. He ground them into powder and scattered the powder over the tombs of those who had sacrificed to them.
The Bible is about the sons of God.
If you read or were told that Genesis 1 is God (El) that's...not wrong... but still has been altered/changed from the original Word which is Elohim.
It's incredibly important that nobody alter or change scriptures so the meaning is not lost.
For millenia before the Old Testament the word Elohim always and only meant "sons of El".
In the beginning Elohim created heaven and earth...(is what you should see in your Bibles if they cared about Truth). Use the NOG translation it's on most any Bible website. Uncensored.
Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2 was adopted into the Bronze Age pantheon of Israel (Canaan) from the broader Levantine polytheism. That's the false Elohim.
The main theme of the Bible is knowing Good from Evil, Holy Trinity from Unholy Trinity and Genesis 1 true Elohim from Genesis 2 false Yahweh Elohim.
The clever snake in Genesis 3 knew Elohim from Yahweh Elohim...
My goodness you sure showed your ignorance of scripture and languages