|
Post by Josh on Feb 15, 2007 17:39:47 GMT -8
The "Red Sea" crossing: Where and How?
You might want to get out an atlas for this.
The top three candidates for this question are:
1) one of the inland lands between Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula. The name "Red Sea" as we see it in our text only literally means "Sea of Reeds".
2/3) either the Gulf of Suez or the Gulf of Aqaba (northern fingers of the Red Sea). If you conclude that Sinai is to be located on the Sinai Peninsula, it makes sense that the crossing was at the Gulf of Suez. If you locate Mt. Sinai in Arabia, then the Gulf of Aqaba makes more sense.
Since the main channels of these gulfs, as I am told, have a trench about 1,000 feet deep, and since compelling 'naturalistic' explanations of the sea being parted by 'wind set-down' have been offered, I take it that the crossing occured at the extreme northern tip of one of these gulfs. According to the 'wind-set down theory', the winds may have exposed an underwater ridge of land on which the Israelites crossed the tip of the gulf, with the Egyptians in hot pursuit.
It's important to note that the Exodus text says the crossing was accomplished only after a whole night of blowing wind (Exodus 14:21). This seems to stress the natural cause of the event. If God had wanted to, He could have just parted the water without any apparent natural cause, but instead He decided to use a natural agent- wind- to blow a path through the sea.
Also, the 'wind set-down' model can account for the 'wall of water on both sides': up to 4 feet, in fact, according to some researchers.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 15, 2007 17:42:12 GMT -8
4/17/06: Anyone feel free to post here: In what ways is the Exodus story symbolic of either the story of Jesus, or our own story in growing in faith? Take this link for some of my thoughts on this passage, and please, feel free to post a reply here. Crossing the 'Red Sea': Israel, Jesus, and Us www.aletheiacf.com/site/cpage.asp?cpage_id=5962&sec_id=2432
|
|
|
Post by rose on Feb 15, 2007 17:43:22 GMT -8
4/17/06:
Thank you Josh for putting all of that together like that...there are many similarities to Jesus and our christian faith that I did not see when I read it. What an awesome God to take such great care and planning when dealing with his children.
|
|
|
Post by rose on Feb 15, 2007 17:44:38 GMT -8
4/17/06:
The one thing I thought of that was symbolic of our own story was how the pillar of cloud/fire is like the Bible for us. God's word goes before us assuring us that God is with us on our way to the promised land. We can look to the Bible to know that He is in control and taking care of us.
|
|
|
Post by rose on Feb 15, 2007 17:46:05 GMT -8
4/17/06:
What in the world did God mean when he said in chapter 14 verse 4, "and I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and he will pursue them. But I will gain glory for myself through Pharaoh and all his army".
I know we talked before about the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, but now he's talking about gaining glory for himself from the event as well. He says this same sentence further along in the chapter as well. This really makes it seem like Pharaoh is just a pawn in the real life game of chess. God's using Pharaoh to make himself look good? Hmmm...any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 15, 2007 17:48:40 GMT -8
4/17/06:
Exodus 13: "20 After leaving Succoth they camped at Etham on the edge of the desert. 21 By day the LORD went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night. 22 Neither the pillar of cloud by day nor the pillar of fire by night left its place in front of the people."
Some see the pillar of cloud/ fire as a reference to Mt. Sinai itself, off in the distance—a raging volcano emiting a pillar of ash and fire several miles into the air, like a beacon, guiding them to their destination. Many of the verses related to the Pillar of Fire/ Cloud can fit this suggestion, though perhaps not all (there are some verses about the pillar/ cloud that occur after the visit to Sinai, and there is some discussion whether these pillars are equivalent to the ‘cloud’ that later descends on the Tabernacle or not). See if you can find verses to support or challenge this notion.
|
|
|
Post by rose on Feb 15, 2007 17:50:02 GMT -8
4/17/06:
Exodus 14:19 says that the angel of God withdrew and went behind them and that the pillar of cloud also moved from in front and stood behind them.
The next verses talk about how the pillar of cloud brought darkness to one side and light to the other side. If it was a volcano, wouldn't the cloud of dust and ash bring darkness to both sides of the mountain?
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 15, 2007 17:51:08 GMT -8
4/18/06:
"Exodus 14:19 Then the angel of God, who had been traveling in front of Israel's army, withdrew and went behind them. The pillar of cloud also moved from in front and stood behind them, 20 coming between the armies of Egypt and Israel. Throughout the night the cloud brought darkness to the one side and light to the other side; so neither went near the other all night long."
According to the view that the pillar of fire/cloud is a volcanic Sinai (which I am interested in, but not endorsing, btw), this wording is similar to the saying "the sun setting". The theory advocates, (and this part is rather persuasive), that the trade route descending to the Gulf of Aqaba (which would have the most logical route of the Israelites) gets down to sea level a couple miles south of the tip of the Gulf, requiring the Israelites to "turn back" from their southeastern direction (toward the Arabian Sinai), and head north up to the tip of the gulf, which the Israelites were intending to go around. This would put the volcanic Sinai/ pillar of fire/ cloud behind them. Rear scouts would have reported the Egyptians coming from behind them, thus the Pillar would be seen to be 'between them' and the Egyptians.
This view also holds that the Eygptians seem to have also driven their chariots on an alternative northern route, enabling a pincer movement (Eygyptian foot soldiers pursuing the Israelites from behind, or southeast, and Egyptian chariots cutting them off in front from the north).
This being surrounded was the set up for the miracle-- there was nowhere else to go, with impenatrable desert mountains to the west, and the Egyptians to the north AND south, the only way to go was EAST across the extreme northern end of the Gulf of Aqaba, about 3 1/2 miles to the other side.
How this theory explains the darkness and light, I can't ascertain- definitely one of the weak spots.
In addition to the difference been accepting these miracles as transcendant/scientifically unexplainable and looking for naturalistic causes in such miracle texts, a lot of this discussion also depends on whether one views every detail in these accounts as meticulous historical reporting or whether one allows for some degree of legendary development. Obviously different expectations and interpretations stem from these very different viewpoints as well.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 15, 2007 17:53:00 GMT -8
4/18/06:
Although a lot of verses seem to gel quite well with the 'volcano theory', here is a list of some that probably present the theory with problems:
The moving pillar- already discussed above (Exodus 14:19-20)
The pillar showing up, presumably in the camp of the Israelites, after the Israelites have left Mt. Sinai (Numbers 12:5 or Deut, 31:15 for example)
And the description of the role the pillar(s)/ cloud played in the 40 years of wilderness wanderings: (Exodus 40:3-39)
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 15, 2007 17:54:33 GMT -8
4/19/06: Here's a question submitted by Stacy: "No, I'm not lobbying for my husband to have his own sea, although that might make a nice gift. Watching National Geographic on Easter afternoon with my dad, I heard an "expert" (I wish I remembered his name) claim very firmly that "Red" was actually an ancient "typo," meaning the Red Sea was actually named the Reed Sea, after the abundant reeds growing in it. That claim of course spurred some curiousity in me, since we just studied the natural explanations for several of the plagues. Any thoughts out there?"
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 15, 2007 17:55:20 GMT -8
4/19/06:
Here's the basics:
'yam suph' is the original Hebrew, 'yam' meaning lake or sea and 'suph' meaning reeds or marshy area.
When the original Hebrew of Exodus was translated into the Greee (known as the Septuagint), the translators changed this phrase to from 'sea of reeds' to 'red sea', presumably because they felt they knew where indeed the crossing at occured and where trying to make it clearer for the reader.
Although our modern translations tend to favor the Hebrew texts of the OT over the Greek Septuagint, for some reason (tradition) our versions stick with Red Sea (with Sea of Reeds noted in the margin).
That said, the definitions of Red Sea and Reed Sea can overlap: for instance, the heads of the gulfs of Aqaba and Suez have reeds, just like the inland lakes of the Sinai.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 15, 2007 17:56:06 GMT -8
4/30/06:
Sunday April 30th we'll be looking at the 'song of deliverance' sung by the Israelites after their Red Sea crossing- examining what it says about their relationship to God, and further, the role that music has to play in the life of a follower of God.
Also: checkout out an interesting parallel passage: Habakkuk chapter 3. Here Habakkuk hearkens back to the Red Sea crossing to find strength for his time of trial, and puts his words into something of a song as well.
|
|