Yes, but that just pushes the miracle back one step. God didn’t miraculously part the waters, he miraculously created a gigantic wind that pushed the waters out of the way, and dried the seafloor, and didn’t knock over the Israelites. It’s the exact same miraculous effect, and requires the exact same amount of miraculous power, not that an omnipotent God cares about conserving miracle-power.
Either God created a miracle which allowed the Israelites to cross the sea, or the whole thing was a fanciful story possibly but not neccesarily loosely inspired by actual events.
Because this is GQ I’ll nitpick - the Lost tribes weren’t lost at this time. And there weren’t any tribes at all at the time of Abraham and Lot, since the tribes came from the children (and grandchildren) of Jacob.
More to the point, this part of the story is all about God doing miracles to prove his godhood, and objecting to cases where a natural explanation could be used. So it being a miracle is a much better explanation.
I like to know the truth, even about what men have written, I look through a lot of historical writings and also check them if I wonder if it is the truth or fiction. Like Washington throwing a dollar over the patomoc etc. .
That is the King James version, The Douay is what I quoted. It doesn’t make sense that the Pharao would send just his horse in to the sea. The translation of the KJV was translated later and so for centuries it was quoted as that. I believe the translators wanted things to add up, so they didn’t put Pharao on the horse.
Why would they say earlier it was his horsemen or army, then have Pharao send in his horse…for what purpose would his horse serve? Plus since it would take a hundred mile an hour wind to blow the waters over a mound in the ground,like the experiment did (and dry it)it seems a lot of bother for a supreme being to do, when he could just as well struck all Pharao’s army down and there would have been no need for the Israelites to wander around in a desert for 40 years. I am questioning the science behind the show I watched, and their reasoning.
Killing a lot of innocent people to get the Pharao, then let him be one who wasn’t hurt, after god hardened his heart so he couldn’t be compassionate is not saying much for the way the translaters or writers describe their god!
I didn’t see you quote anything, just tell us to look at that particular verse. I quoted the KJV for the sake of this English-language message board. I don’t need a translation; I am fluent in the original Hebrew, have read this portion from the Torah every year for the past 27 years (lucky me that this particular thread deals in a Biblical story from my own Bar Mitzvah portion!), and can personally attest that the KJV translates it accurately.
Why would Pharaoh send his horse in without him? As I said, the word “horse” could be meaning “horse-based forces”, i.e., cavalry, not that the king himself participated in the chase after the Israelites. It’s also possible that even if it was literally Pharaoh’s own horse, and Pharaoh was present at the sea, that it charged with the other horses even if Pharaoh himself was too scared or awed to go himself. One way or another, the verse never says that Pharaoh himself went into the sea and/or drowned. You may think it is inferred from the verse, but such an inference was not shared by thousands-years-old Jewish oral tradition.
well, I watched another show which argued for the sea (or lake, or whatever body of water) parting due to seismic activity. Which kind of makes a lot of sense to me, if you make a piece of land go up temporarily, the water will pour out, then if it sinks back in, the water will come flooding back. Or, alternatively, you can depress another piece of land nearby to drain the water from a higher area and then reflood it by pushing that depression back up.
fighting strawmen, huh? Jews could not have built pyramids for the simple reason that pyramids were built by the kings of the Old Kingdom, whereas the Exodus is thought to have happened in the beginning of the New Kingdom, around a thousand years later. At which time Egyptian kings were buried in underground tombs to save money. Besides, the pyramids and other royal graves were usually built in the Cairo area whereas Jews and other Asian nomads who ended up in Egypt under the Hyksos lived in the Delta. Big distance away.
Which is why, if you actually bother to read the source text, you will find out that Jews built “treasure cities” such as the city called Rameses in the Delta region about which you can read here Ramesses II - Wikipedia .
According to Cecil: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gm7OswqOe0
the pharaoh (Yul Brenner) sits in his personal chariot on the shore while his army rushes into the sea bed to eventually be drowned. Watch at 3:05 mark.
Back to the OP, it would seem to me that since humans are about the same density as water, and are not particularly aerodynamic, any wind that could blow water away would blow people away just as well.
Even when I was a devout kid I never understood the need to prove natural occurrences causing miracles- they were miraculous after all and proving that something remotely like it could happen naturally didn’t really help one way or the other. I also seriously doubt there’s ever been a version of events taken down from oral sources centuries after the fact that didn’t do some really really serious flubbing and exaggerations even if the point wasn’t to promote a religion or establish the tellers as the chosen; objective history wouldn’t exist for thousands of years.
That said, one thing I saw on a documentary about the Exodus I thought was interesting was about the “pillar of fire” that was behind them. This, per the documentary, was an ages old tactic- light a very big and very bright fire at night between you and pursuers does to things:
1- It obscures your movements and acts as a shield
2- Even if they cross the firewall your pursuers will have vision problems for at least several minutes while their eyes adjust to the darkness
While I have no problem believing that a group of Semitic nomads returned to what’s now Israel after generations as an invasion force, there’s no historical or archaeological evidence that it was anything remotely as massive as the Exodus described in the Bible and in fact there’s hardly any chance that region could support such a moving force. Personally I’ve always seen the story of the Exodus and the mountain/golden calf as an allegory for the transition to monotheism and one that just grew exponentially with every generation until its filled with miracles and millions instead of a few small bands and some good timing.
Much heavier. (Much denser, actually.) When a duck floats, almost everything but the feet is in the air. When a human floats, almost everything but the head is in the water.
Then your God is a Monster? The God who was responsible for the Pharao, lets a whole lot of innocent people die after He was said to harden the Pharao’s heart.He seems to go through a lot of trouble to do things harder and more cruel than any human. Of course there is no historical proof for Moses or no Chariots were found in the Red Sea. It is just a belief but one that doesn’t add up!
I guess that is why people like to think of stories and each one puts it’s own spin on it.
Why did it mention that there were chariots etcChapter 15 verse 4 Reads: “Pharao’s and his hosts hath he cast into the sea:his chosen captains also are drowned in the Red Sea”. surely there were drivers of humans on the chariots? It is sort of the same way of translating.
I have read all of the Old Testement and the New, read the Bible through many times and that is why I do not believe it. I must admit it took me many years and times of reading it before I stopped to question what I had read. I had just assumed it was all true at first, it was when I was teacing it to children that I could see the contradictions. I guess at that stage in my life I wanted it to be true.
which argued for the sea (or lake, or whatever body of water) parting due to seismic activity. Which kind of makes a lot of sense to me, if you make a piece of land go up temporarily, the water will pour out, then if it sinks back in, the water will come flooding back. Or, alternatively, you can depress another piece of land nearby to drain the water from a higher area and then reflood it by pushing that depression back up.