snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05 April 2007, 02:43 PM
llewtrah's Avatar
llewtrah llewtrah is offline
 
Join Date: 13 December 2001
Location: Chelmsford, UK
Posts: 16,363
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diddy View Post
Which is why is specified former slaves. Not nomads. I am very well aware of the existence of nomadic people.

Despite that why is crossing a marsh such an important event that it bears mentioning in the level as a miracle?

Plus we are talking about Egypt. I am pretty sure that most people know what it looked like back in Ramses time.
Why is it impossible that former slaves can become nomads and still refer to themselves with pride as former slaves i.e. emphasising the "former" and their escape from slavery? In a modern parallel I see persons referring to themselves as the descendents of African slaves, stating this with pride as a descritption of their ancestry. Equiano is described as a "former slave". What a person was formerly doesn't prevent them being something else latterly.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05 April 2007, 04:25 PM
diddy diddy is offline
 
Join Date: 07 March 2004
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 10,928
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by llewtrah View Post
Why is it impossible that former slaves can become nomads and still refer to themselves with pride as former slaves i.e. emphasising the "former" and their escape from slavery? In a modern parallel I see persons referring to themselves as the descendents of African slaves, stating this with pride as a descritption of their ancestry. Equiano is described as a "former slave". What a person was formerly doesn't prevent them being something else latterly.
So? What matters is their survivable capability in the desert for 40 years. Not what they define themselves as. Slavery is a condition. It does not in any way imply or suggest that they had the ability to cope in the desert for 40 years.

Of course before we can call them slaves we first have to define if the Egyptians actually kept them as slaves. We don't. All we know is that one source suggest that there were Hebrews in Egypt. How can thousands of people at once survive in the desert for 40 years when their is no evidence that they possessed that knowledge in the first place.? That's at best only one new generation.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05 April 2007, 04:41 PM
diddy diddy is offline
 
Join Date: 07 March 2004
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 10,928
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad from Georgia View Post
You mean the Christian Voice resource is wrong?

(emphasis mine)
According to these guys: Probaly
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07 April 2007, 05:58 AM
Quantum Leap2
 
Posts: n/a
Icon605

In the nonfiction book The Gold of Exodus by Howard Blum, Larry Williams and Bob Cornuke sneaked into Saudi Arabia to the mountain Jabal al Lawz. They found the remains of the stone altar, the 12 pillars that Moses ordered to be erected, the cave where Moses slept, a scorched spot on the mountain top where God gave Moses the two stone tablets of the 10 commandments. They did not have time to look for any buried gold as they were arrested. I can't say here about the parting of the Red sea but the Israelites were not still in Egypt.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08 April 2007, 05:55 AM
PrometheusX303
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You might also find this interesting:

Mathematician explains parting of Red Sea

Study: Red Sea Parting Possible


Biblical Plagues and Parting of Red Sea caused by Volcano


I am not, of course, claiming that these validate the Exodus story.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09 April 2007, 02:29 AM
queen of the caramels's Avatar
queen of the caramels queen of the caramels is offline
 
Join Date: 24 November 2005
Location: Quebec
Posts: 4,573
Icon215

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrometheusX303 View Post
You might also find this interesting:

Mathematician explains parting of Red Sea

Study: Red Sea Parting Possible


Biblical Plagues and Parting of Red Sea caused by Volcano


I am not, of course, claiming that these validate the Exodus story.
My sis and her beloved were in Sharm-El- Shiekh on Dec 26 2004. They both noted that the sea-level in the Red Sea dropped and the returned , only realising later of the earthquake in the Indian ocean( lazy Wiki cite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_tsunami). So I guess it COULD be possible, if highly unlikely for that amount of water to be displaced.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10 April 2007, 01:12 AM
Howard
 
Posts: n/a
Default

As far as the reed sea goes, I remember seeing a show on the History Channel (IIRC) that talked about it. There was something about a strong westerly wind that causes the water level to drop, which would have made it possible for a large group of people to pass through. Once the wind died down, the water level rises and makes it unlikely that another large group would have an easy time following.

It's not exactly as dramatic as the Red Sea parting, and Charlton Heston would've looked silly hiking up his skirt while slogging through a swamp.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10 April 2007, 02:10 PM
diddy diddy is offline
 
Join Date: 07 March 2004
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 10,928
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard View Post
As far as the reed sea goes, I remember seeing a show on the History Channel (IIRC) that talked about it. There was something about a strong westerly wind that causes the water level to drop, which would have made it possible for a large group of people to pass through. Once the wind died down, the water level rises and makes it unlikely that another large group would have an easy time following.

It's not exactly as dramatic as the Red Sea parting, and Charlton Heston would've looked silly hiking up his skirt while slogging through a swamp.

I know nothing about the size of this supposed "Reed Sea" Which I am still suspicious of, but.... A marsh of any size would need one heck of a wind storm to drain a normally impassable marsh to let the (presumably) large amount of slaves through it. But I agree, not amazing at all and one wonders why it deserves mention.

Plus I have yet to see a bible that substitutes the Red sea for Reed Sea but that doesn't mean it exists..
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10 April 2007, 02:26 PM
Howard
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diddy View Post
I know nothing about the size of this supposed "Reed Sea" Which I am still suspicious of, but.... A marsh of any size would need one heck of a wind storm to drain a normally impassable marsh to let the (presumably) large amount of slaves through it. But I agree, not amazing at all and one wonders why it deserves mention.

Plus I have yet to see a bible that substitutes the Red sea for Reed Sea but that doesn't mean it exists..
Well, here's what Wikipedia says:

Quote:
The Reed Sea (Sea of Seaweed, Sea of Reeds) , was the name for a lake close to the Red Sea, which has since dried up due to the Suez Canal. It is in modern Egypt. There is a common misinterpretation that the Reed Sea is Sabħat al Bardawīl, a large lagoon on the north coast of the Sinai Peninsula.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10 April 2007, 02:38 PM
diddy diddy is offline
 
Join Date: 07 March 2004
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 10,928
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard View Post
Well, here's what Wikipedia says:
Yea, I saw that, and one of their links is suspect of the whole idea that the bible was referring to a lake.
Quote:
“Yam suph” would be more correctly translated “sea of seaweed,” and could refer to any body of water – freshwater or saltwater – in which aquatic weeds flourish.
Still, the ability for a wind to drain a lake is impressive in itself. But we are digressing anyways...
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10 April 2007, 02:42 PM
Howard
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I located the show on the History Channel website. He's the wiki article on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_Decoded
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10 April 2007, 10:52 PM
Hans Off's Avatar
Hans Off Hans Off is offline
 
Join Date: 14 May 2004
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 4,577
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by queen of the caramels View Post
My sis and her beloved were in Sharm-El- Shiekh on Dec 26 2004. They both noted that the sea-level in the Red Sea dropped and the returned , only realising later of the earthquake in the Indian ocean( lazy Wiki cite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_tsunami). So I guess it COULD be possible, if highly unlikely for that amount of water to be displaced.
No offence, but WTF?

are they sure about that?

I strongly doubt that the 2004 Tsunami had anything to do with that...

Methinks it might have been the tide.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.