Proof Moses Parted Waters, Bible's Red Sea Miracle Is Real?

The funny thing is. This is from an atheist forum. What do you think of this? It's interesting. First link goes to an atheist forum discusssing it. Second link is an actual article with claimed proof of Moses parting the waters at the Red Sea.

Bible's Red Sea Miracle Is Real?

The Red Sea Crossing

*cue 50 page religious debate/bashing.*

Nonetheless, it's interesting (and funny, that it's on an atheist forum).

This outlines the theoretical possibility that what was described in the book of Exodus could happen due to purely natural physical phenomena.

I don't see how that's proof that a guy told the sea to get out of his way and divine intervention caused it to oblige.

This outlines the theoretical possibility that what was described in the book of Exodus could happen due to purely natural physical phenomena.

I don't see how that's proof that a guy told the sea to get out of his way and divine intervention caused it to oblige.

GabuEx

This outlines the theoretical possibility that what was described in the book of Exodus could happen due to purely natural physical phenomena.

I don't see how that's proof that a guy told the sea to get out of his way and divine intervention caused it to oblige.

GabuEx

God used Laws of Physics?

i thought Jesus parted the sea....

You can't evoke the supernatural and claim it to be scientific evidence. And just because atheist are discussing this, it doesn't make it any more valid than it is; that is to say, not at all.

That's not proof of Moses magically parting the water. Theoretically it's possible, but I highly doubt anyone can pull it off without some kind of complex mechanism (or magic).

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

This outlines the theoretical possibility that what was described in the book of Exodus could happen due to purely natural physical phenomena.

I don't see how that's proof that a guy told the sea to get out of his way and divine intervention caused it to oblige.

Blazerdt47

God used Laws of Physics?

If a human parted an ocean, then I studied potions at hogwarts

i thought Jesus parted the sea....

cee1gee

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

This outlines the theoretical possibility that what was described in the book of Exodus could happen due to purely natural physical phenomena.

I don't see how that's proof that a guy told the sea to get out of his way and divine intervention caused it to oblige.

Blazerdt47

God used Laws of Physics?

If what the book of Exodus claims to have happened is explainable through natural physical phenomena, then why do we need to bring God into the equation?

This is something that should concern fundamentalist Christians who hold that the Bible is a literal historical account, really. If God is not needed to cause the events in Exodus, then the likelihood significantly increases that the events in Exodus were simply a chance alignment of natural phenomena that then were embellished after the fact, instead of anything approaching divine intervention.

i thought Jesus parted the sea....

cee1gee

While it probably isn't completely true, it is very interesting to read where these stories could have come from. The author of Exodus could have been inspired by that sea-splitting event and decided to write the Exodus then.

Also, take a look at this Cracked article. While it doesn't prove Creationism, it shows that people (and especially atheists) shouldn't dismiss or flat out deny many of these stories. Sure, the actual story may be fiction, but the inspiration for them and the event could be real.

Just one teeny tiny problem with the TC's claim. That even theological professors will admit that the term "Red Sea" is most likely a mistranslation of the original text. IIRC they refer to it as the Yam Suph: "sea or reeds" or "reed sea". Red....reed....yeah.

The actual location that most theologians and historians believe this may of actually happened is actually not a sea at all. It's a marsh, and in low tide you can walk straight through it. But in high tide It's deep enough to require a boat. Wish I could remember the specific location of this marsh.

As already stated every single event in the Exodus can be explained by natural occurrences. Yes ALL of them.

[QUOTE="Blazerdt47"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

This outlines the theoretical possibility that what was described in the book of Exodus could happen due to purely natural physical phenomena.

I don't see how that's proof that a guy told the sea to get out of his way and divine intervention caused it to oblige.

GabuEx

God used Laws of Physics?

If what the book of Exodus claims to have happened is explainable through natural physical phenomena, then why do we need to bring God into the equation?

This is something that should concern fundamentalist Christians who hold that the Bible is a literal historical account, really. If God is not needed to cause the events in Exodus, then the likelihood significantly increases that the events in Exodus were simply a chance alignment of natural phenomena that then were embellished after the fact, instead of anything approaching divine intervention.

So the Isrealities just happened to pack up shop and show up at the edge of the Red Sea just in time for a natural phenomenon to save their asses? How did they know this would happen?

but if you BELIEVE thats what happened then it happened.Naru_Naru_Naru

[

So the Isrealities just happened to pack up shop and show up at the edge of the Red Sea just in time for a natural phenomenon to save their asses? How did they know this would happen?

hartsickdiscipl

[QUOTE="Naru_Naru_Naru"] but if you BELIEVE thats what happened then it happened.ColonelVodka

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[

So the Isrealities just happened to pack up shop and show up at the edge of the Red Sea just in time for a natural phenomenon to save their asses? How did they know this would happen?

thriteenthmonke

Seems more likely than them making it by chance.

Their conclusion sounds quite dubious to me, too many things that need to fall into place EXACTLY right. Also, these people said it theoretically COULD have happened, how does that lead to proof that it DID happen exactly?

Also, there are mounds of scientific evidence disproving that the Exodus even happened, the most likely scenario is that the Jews were not Jews at all and not from Egypt proper. They were of a lower caste of Egyptian society who rebelled against the Egyptian system of rule and migrated to Canaan. Prove to me that Moses was actually a real person, then prove to me that the Jews were actually Egyptian slaves, then prove to me that they went on a single exodus out of Egypt, and then we can start debating the PLAUSIBILITY of the claims the accounts of such events make.

Just one teeny tiny problem with the TC's claim. That even theological professors will admit that the term "Red Sea" is most likely a mistranslation of the original text. IIRC they refer to it as the Yam Suph: "sea or reeds" or "reed sea". Red....reed....yeah.

keech

Actually that's not as universally accepted as you are stating here. Theological professors will often admit that the literal translation of "Yum Suf" or "Yam Suf" is "Reed Sea", but that doesn't imply that a majority of them think the literal translation is apt. The translation of Yum Suf into the Greek equivalent of "Red Sea" in context with the Exodus story we know today goes back more than 2000 years in the Septuagint. "Yum suf" is actually used in other parts of the Tanakh in ways that could refer to both salt water seas that don't grow reeds and freshwater seas that grow reeds, so even the complication that the Red Sea cannot literally grow reeds is not a 100% sure sign that the term could not have been used to refer to the Red Sea.

Personally, I believe it is a mistranslation, and I think "Reed Sea" probably fits. But it's by no means admitted by a majority of theological professors.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Blazerdt47"]

God used Laws of Physics?

hartsickdiscipl

If what the book of Exodus claims to have happened is explainable through natural physical phenomena, then why do we need to bring God into the equation?

This is something that should concern fundamentalist Christians who hold that the Bible is a literal historical account, really. If God is not needed to cause the events in Exodus, then the likelihood significantly increases that the events in Exodus were simply a chance alignment of natural phenomena that then were embellished after the fact, instead of anything approaching divine intervention.

So the Isrealities just happened to pack up shop and show up at the edge of the Red Sea just in time for a natural phenomenon to save their asses? How did they know this would happen?

Coincidence? Jk lol. :P

On why we need God to perform these supernatural occurences, how the heck would a human be able to do that? Your saying we don't need God to do them when humans can? OK be right back, going to part the Atlantic...

Their conclusion sounds quite dubious to me, too many things that need to fall into place EXACTLY right. Also, these people said it theoretically COULD have happened, how does that lead to proof that it DID happen exactly?

Also, there are mounds of scientific evidence disproving that the Exodus even happened, the most likely scenario is that the Jews were not Jews at all and not from Egypt proper. They were of a lower caste of Egyptian society who rebelled against the Egyptian system of rule and migrated to Canaan. Prove to me that Moses was actually a real person, then prove to me that the Jews were actually Egyptian slaves, then prove to me that they went on a single exodus out of Egypt, and then we can start debating the PLAUSIBILITY of the claims the accounts of such events make.

theone86

I get the feeling that your idea of having something proven to you involves pictures and/or videos. Because, you know.. no actual history happened before we could record it with modern technology.

I could hand you a book that would change your world, even if you didn't believe that 50% of the translation was correct. It's a translation of Sumerian tablets much older than the Bible, but with much content that is clearly source material for Genesis. It's far more detailed, and paints a completely different picture of God, Angels, Demons, and the history of early mankind as we know ourselves. I've never read something that made so much sense in my life. It's called "The Lost Book of Enki."

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

If what the book of Exodus claims to have happened is explainable through natural physical phenomena, then why do we need to bring God into the equation?

This is something that should concern fundamentalist Christians who hold that the Bible is a literal historical account, really. If God is not needed to cause the events in Exodus, then the likelihood significantly increases that the events in Exodus were simply a chance alignment of natural phenomena that then were embellished after the fact, instead of anything approaching divine intervention.

Blazerdt47

So the Isrealities just happened to pack up shop and show up at the edge of the Red Sea just in time for a natural phenomenon to save their asses? How did they know this would happen?

Coincidence? Jk lol. :P

On why we need God to perform these supernatural occurences, how the heck would a human be able to do that? Your saying we don't need God to do them when humans can? OK be right back, going to part the Atlantic...

I'm not sure why you directed that at me.. I'm a firm believer in God, but not always in a literal interpretation of the Bible, the Old Testament in particular. I think that the idea of God that we have has been passed-down from awestruck humans who had no concept of what advanced technology can be capable of.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

Their conclusion sounds quite dubious to me, too many things that need to fall into place EXACTLY right. Also, these people said it theoretically COULD have happened, how does that lead to proof that it DID happen exactly?

Also, there are mounds of scientific evidence disproving that the Exodus even happened, the most likely scenario is that the Jews were not Jews at all and not from Egypt proper. They were of a lower caste of Egyptian society who rebelled against the Egyptian system of rule and migrated to Canaan. Prove to me that Moses was actually a real person, then prove to me that the Jews were actually Egyptian slaves, then prove to me that they went on a single exodus out of Egypt, and then we can start debating the PLAUSIBILITY of the claims the accounts of such events make.

hartsickdiscipl

I get the feeling that your idea of having something proven to you involves pictures and/or videos. Because, you know.. no actual history happened before we could record it with modern technology.

I could hand you a book that would change your world, even if you didn't believe that 50% of the translation was correct. It's a translation of Sumerian tablets much older than the Bible, but with much content that is clearly source material for Genesis. It's far more detailed, and paints a completely different picture of God, Angels, Demons, and the history of early mankind as we know ourselves. I've never read something that made so much sense in my life. It's called "The Lost Book of Enki."

No, it involves accepted archeological and antrhopological evidence. It involves signs of anti-authoritarian destruction during the same period the Exodus is reported to have taken place in, it involves Egyptian records speaking of Canaanites, it involves uncanny similarities in pottery from Egyptian territories and Canaanites ones, and it involves a logical explanation for the Exodus as a romanticization of the entire ordeal.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="theone86"]

Their conclusion sounds quite dubious to me, too many things that need to fall into place EXACTLY right. Also, these people said it theoretically COULD have happened, how does that lead to proof that it DID happen exactly?

Also, there are mounds of scientific evidence disproving that the Exodus even happened, the most likely scenario is that the Jews were not Jews at all and not from Egypt proper. They were of a lower caste of Egyptian society who rebelled against the Egyptian system of rule and migrated to Canaan. Prove to me that Moses was actually a real person, then prove to me that the Jews were actually Egyptian slaves, then prove to me that they went on a single exodus out of Egypt, and then we can start debating the PLAUSIBILITY of the claims the accounts of such events make.

theone86

I get the feeling that your idea of having something proven to you involves pictures and/or videos. Because, you know.. no actual history happened before we could record it with modern technology.

I could hand you a book that would change your world, even if you didn't believe that 50% of the translation was correct. It's a translation of Sumerian tablets much older than the Bible, but with much content that is clearly source material for Genesis. It's far more detailed, and paints a completely different picture of God, Angels, Demons, and the history of early mankind as we know ourselves. I've never read something that made so much sense in my life. It's called "The Lost Book of Enki."

No, it involves accepted archeological and antrhopological evidence. It involves signs of anti-authoritarian destruction during the same period the Exodus is reported to have taken place in, it involves Egyptian records speaking of Canaanites, it involves uncanny similarities in pottery from Egyptian territories and Canaanites ones, and it involves a logical explanation for the Exodus as a romanticization of the entire ordeal.

It's interesting how the Bible actually details how Moses' people were told that they would inherit the land of Canaan after wandering the desert following the Exodus from Egypt. Canaanites after the Exodus = Isrealites.

I'm not exactly sure what the arguement here is.

If God chose to destroy the city of Sodom with fire from the sky, why not do it with a comet breaking up in the atmosphere and showering fire (basically) down on the city. It's still done per His will.

If God chose to help Moses lead people out of Egypt, why not do it by using wind to push the water away. It's still done per His will.

I'm not sure I see what the conflict is.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

This outlines the theoretical possibility that what was described in the book of Exodus could happen due to purely natural physical phenomena.

I don't see how that's proof that a guy told the sea to get out of his way and divine intervention caused it to oblige.

Blazerdt47

God used Laws of Physics?

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I get the feeling that your idea of having something proven to you involves pictures and/or videos. Because, you know.. no actual history happened before we could record it with modern technology.

I could hand you a book that would change your world, even if you didn't believe that 50% of the translation was correct. It's a translation of Sumerian tablets much older than the Bible, but with much content that is clearly source material for Genesis. It's far more detailed, and paints a completely different picture of God, Angels, Demons, and the history of early mankind as we know ourselves. I've never read something that made so much sense in my life. It's called "The Lost Book of Enki."

hartsickdiscipl

No, it involves accepted archeological and antrhopological evidence. It involves signs of anti-authoritarian destruction during the same period the Exodus is reported to have taken place in, it involves Egyptian records speaking of Canaanites, it involves uncanny similarities in pottery from Egyptian territories and Canaanites ones, and it involves a logical explanation for the Exodus as a romanticization of the entire ordeal.

It's interesting how the Bible actually details how Moses' people were told that they would inherit the land of Canaan after wandering the desert following the Exodus from Egypt. Canaanites after the Exodus = Isrealites.

Are you trying to say that it was prophetic? Because it wasn't. The Torah was written after the fact, so of course it is going to say that god told them they were going to inherit Canaan because they were already living in Canaan. Also, Isrealites didn't exist before they left Egypt, before that they were just Egyptians. Isrealite was a label that was slef-applied to give them their own identity. Also, there's no evidence that a singular Exodus ever happened, rather that a series of seperate migrations occured. Also, there's no evidence that they wandered the desert as described in the Bible, that would have led to them all dying. At best, they lived a nomadic lifestyle for a period of time.

Maybe it was just low tide?

Seems to me this proves nothing. Certainly not that this was done Moses.

Here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/bibles-buried-secrets.html

Goes over all the archeological evidence of what parts of the New Testament are true, which are most likely tales, how to explain the tales if they aren't true, etc.

i distrust pbs.. i have to put up witht heir BS despite living above the border..

Here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/bibles-buried-secrets.html

Goes over all the archeological evidence of what parts of the New Testament are true, which are most likely tales, how to explain the tales if they aren't true, etc.

theone86

http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

In my opinion we are too far seperated from the times that these events did or would have happened, so there will never be any "proof" in the conventional sense. I won't lose any sleep over that.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="theone86"]

No, it involves accepted archeological and antrhopological evidence. It involves signs of anti-authoritarian destruction during the same period the Exodus is reported to have taken place in, it involves Egyptian records speaking of Canaanites, it involves uncanny similarities in pottery from Egyptian territories and Canaanites ones, and it involves a logical explanation for the Exodus as a romanticization of the entire ordeal.

theone86

It's interesting how the Bible actually details how Moses' people were told that they would inherit the land of Canaan after wandering the desert following the Exodus from Egypt. Canaanites after the Exodus = Isrealites.

Are you trying to say that it was prophetic? Because it wasn't. The Torah was written after the fact, so of course it is going to say that god told them they were going to inherit Canaan because they were already living in Canaan. Also, Isrealites didn't exist before they left Egypt, before that they were just Egyptians. Isrealite was a label that was slef-applied to give them their own identity. Also, there's no evidence that a singular Exodus ever happened, rather that a series of seperate migrations occured. Also, there's no evidence that they wandered the desert as described in the Bible, that would have led to them all dying. At best, they lived a nomadic lifestyle for a period of time.

Ever heard of "Manna?"

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

It's interesting how the Bible actually details how Moses' people were told that they would inherit the land of Canaan after wandering the desert following the Exodus from Egypt. Canaanites after the Exodus = Isrealites.

hartsickdiscipl

Are you trying to say that it was prophetic? Because it wasn't. The Torah was written after the fact, so of course it is going to say that god told them they were going to inherit Canaan because they were already living in Canaan. Also, Isrealites didn't exist before they left Egypt, before that they were just Egyptians. Isrealite was a label that was slef-applied to give them their own identity. Also, there's no evidence that a singular Exodus ever happened, rather that a series of seperate migrations occured. Also, there's no evidence that they wandered the desert as described in the Bible, that would have led to them all dying. At best, they lived a nomadic lifestyle for a period of time.

Ever heard of "Manna?"

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="theone86"]

Are you trying to say that it was prophetic? Because it wasn't. The Torah was written after the fact, so of course it is going to say that god told them they were going to inherit Canaan because they were already living in Canaan. Also, Isrealites didn't exist before they left Egypt, before that they were just Egyptians. Isrealite was a label that was slef-applied to give them their own identity. Also, there's no evidence that a singular Exodus ever happened, rather that a series of seperate migrations occured. Also, there's no evidence that they wandered the desert as described in the Bible, that would have led to them all dying. At best, they lived a nomadic lifestyle for a period of time.

majoras_wrath

Ever heard of "Manna?"

There are theories about exactly what manna may have been. I'm wondering what sort of evidence you were hoping to find? Maybe some leftover manna that hasn't decayed in the last 3,000 to 4,000 years? Sorry to disappoint you.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

It's interesting how the Bible actually details how Moses' people were told that they would inherit the land of Canaan after wandering the desert following the Exodus from Egypt. Canaanites after the Exodus = Isrealites.

hartsickdiscipl

Are you trying to say that it was prophetic? Because it wasn't. The Torah was written after the fact, so of course it is going to say that god told them they were going to inherit Canaan because they were already living in Canaan. Also, Isrealites didn't exist before they left Egypt, before that they were just Egyptians. Isrealite was a label that was slef-applied to give them their own identity. Also, there's no evidence that a singular Exodus ever happened, rather that a series of seperate migrations occured. Also, there's no evidence that they wandered the desert as described in the Bible, that would have led to them all dying. At best, they lived a nomadic lifestyle for a period of time.

Ever heard of "Manna?"

When you prove to me that bread can fall from the sky then I will accept skybread as a legitimate explanation as to how the Israelites wandered the desert for forty years, until then anyone who wandered that desert died.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

Here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/bibles-buried-secrets.html

Goes over all the archeological evidence of what parts of the New Testament are true, which are most likely tales, how to explain the tales if they aren't true, etc.

YellowOneKinobi

http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

In my opinion we are too far seperated from the times that these events did or would have happened, so there will never be any "proof" in the conventional sense. I won't lose any sleep over that.

Only my link is from people who are trying to determine facts objectively, and not people who set out with the express purpose of proving the Bible right.

[QUOTE="majoras_wrath"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Ever heard of "Manna?"

hartsickdiscipl

There are theories about exactly what manna may have been. I'm wondering what sort of evidence you were hoping to find? Maybe some leftover manna that hasn't decayed in the last 3,000 to 4,000 years? Sorry to disappoint you.