AdministratorApril 27, 2021 at 4:39 pm
Where does the Bible locate “Yam Suph” – the Hebrew name for the sea said to have been miraculously crossed during the Exodus?
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 5:58 pm
Though I don’t know a whole lot, the weakest argument to me, seems to me to be that “Yam Suph” refers particularly or exclusively to a marshy region in North East Egypt.
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 6:35 pm
The location of Etham would seem to be the key.
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 9:00 pm
Ken, can you expand on why Etham is key?
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 7:08 pm
In the creationist model the Exodus occurred not long after the peak of the Ice Age. The climate was much wetter, and the sea level was lower. The most common reeds in Africa were then are still are papyrus.
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 9:43 pm
Yam Suf יַם סוּף is the Red Sea in both its gulfs and its ‘trunk’. This can be established by a word study of all occurrences in the Bible and in Greek historical references (for the context of the LXX rendition, Ερυθρὰ Θάλασσα Erythra Thalassa). Clearly, yam suf cannot mean “Reed Sea” over at the Elath-Aqaba Gulf (no reeds) which gulf the majority of later references clearly indicate (e.g. Ex 23:31; Num 14:25; 1 Kgs 9:26). Yam Suf/Sof is probably a prepositional/directional name, “end sea”, just as הַיָּם הָאַחֲרוֹן ha-yam ha-aharon (“the sea behind”) is for the Mediterranean Sea (Deut 11:24; 34:2).
From H5486; a termination: – conclusion, end, hinder part.
Total KJV occurrences: 5
A primitive root; to snatch away, that is, terminate: – consume, have an end, perish, X be utterly.
Total KJV occurrences: 9
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 6:51 pm
Glen Fritz has the best idea on these locusts …
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 6:53 pm
We can’t rule out the Creator of the earth to do as HE pleases. Let us use our Spiritual mind in interpretation of the locations of crossing. Could seas have dried up all these years? What is now wasn’t then. Many things to consider over time. He did part a body of water. It DIDN’T have to be small(this is GOD we are talking about).
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 11:00 pm
Something struck me re-reading: In exodus 10:19 kjb “…there remained not one locust in all the coasts of Egypt.” Now…that must be important. If it was an isolated lake, why does the verse mention coasts? Also, *something* happened to the locusts! Did they sink? Carried away by a flow? How long does it take a locust body to sink in water normally? What were the historic currents in either gulf, if any / if known? It’s no coincidence this bit about mentioning the locusts are all gone and didn’t wash back up on shore / “remain in the costs”
MemberApril 27, 2021 at 11:30 pm
Good to be thinking Andrew. I’m not going to spend a huge amount of time on the question, but I did just a bit of research into the Hebrew word. It can be translated as the following.
border, boundary, territory
Many verse citations were given for the Hebrew word.
Let me know if you need or want a list of where and how this Hebrew word was translated. I have bought an expensive software program many years ago and if need be it can bring up a number of Hebrew dictionaries or lexicons or whatever. I’m no scholar as I’m glad to have it pointed out. Whether after consulting further sources your analysis will still have significance I don’t know. But we do have try to learn. It took Thomas Edison some 10,000 attempts before he got the light bulb to where he wanted it to be. (And I’m sure he kept trying to improve it later. Actually I’m not sure… he might have went on to other products. He refined and improved the telephone that Alexander Gram Bell developed.)
MemberApril 28, 2021 at 12:38 am
Regarding the borders of Egypt, I will just copy over here my post from the thread:
<<Biblical and historical indications locate Egypt’s eastern border at a distance of three days’ journey from the Delta. Egypt comprised all the land watered by the Nile (Ex 7:19-21) as determined by Herodotus in his consultation with Egyptian priests who in turn cited a god and an oracle:
The god however… said that that land which was Egypt which the Nile came over and watered, and that those were Egyptians who dwelling below the city of Elephantine drank of that river.
Thus it was answered to them [the priests] by the Oracle about this: and the Nile, when it is in flood, goes over not only the Delta but also of the land which is called Libyan and of that which is called Arabian sometimes as much as two days’ journey on each side, and at times even more than this or at times less.”
Herodotus. “An Account of Egypt: Being the Second Book of His Histories Called Euterpe.” Translated by G. C. Macaulay. Gutenberg. Accessed November 22, 2020. II:18-19 (grammar defective) https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2707/2707-h/2707-h.htm.
Herodotus’ statement about the Nile waters extending into Arabia by two day’s travel is consistent with the details of the exodus journey, a total of two days’ journey from the royal precinct to the Suez Isthmus:
Day 1. Rameses to Succoth (Ex 12:37; Num 33:3, 5)
Day 2. Succoth to Etham (Ex 13:20; Num 33:6).
Egypt’s eastern border in the Suez Isthmus is confirmed by incidental biblical references. According to the exodus narrative, the Israelites left Egypt on the same day they left Succoth (Ex 12:37; cp. v. 51; 13:18) to encamp at Etham “on the edge of the wilderness” (Ex 13:20; Num 33:6). At the next station, Pi-hahiroth on the Red Sea shore, the Israelites considered themselves to be outside of Egypt (Ex 14:11-12; cf. Judg 11:16). Shur lies “before [or east of] Egypt” (Josh 13:3; 1 Chron 13:5), another marker of the eastern border of Egypt. Lake Timsah in the central isthmus receives its water from Nile floods via an east-flowing wadi, Wadi Tumilat, thereby making Etham part of Egypt in Egyptian reckoning (so, Herodotus).>>
So at the time of Herodotus at least, the border of Egypt was in the Suez Isthmus at the border lakes. The Bitter Lakes were outside of Egypt as they are not fed by the Nile. At least they are not now. The Bitter Lakes are a landlocked basin outside of the Nile Delta.
MemberApril 28, 2021 at 1:26 pm
Just in case someone is wondering re the contradiction above re 2 days vs 3 days to the border of Egypt… both are right. It is 2 days from Rameses to Shur in the Isthmus if you are heading east out of Egypt towards Canaan on the Way of Shur (Rameses-Succoth-Shur). But if you take the Way of the Wilderness of the Red Sea through Etham instead, it is another day south to Etham, also in the Isthmus (Rameses-Succoth-Etham). Guess which one the Israelites took? 🙂
Note that the choice of routes seems to have been made at Succoth (Ex 12:37 cf. 13:17-20). This means that the Way of the Land of the Philistines also passed through Succoth in Wadi Tumilat, probably crossing the el-Gisr ridge with the Way of Shur and then heading for the Med coast. To have some fun with Robert Frost: “Two roads diverged at Succoth, and I — I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.”
In the Roman time the route to Gaza from Memphis and Heliopolis passed the western end of the Wadi-t-Tumeylát [Tumilat]… and the chief modern [as current in 1863] route from Cairo to Syria passes along the Wadi-t-Tumeylát and leads to Gaza.
<hr align=”left” size=”1″ width=”33%”>
William G. Smith, “Red Sea, Passage Of,” in A Dictionary Of The Bible, Comprising Its Antiquities, Biography, Geography, and Natural History (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, & Company, 1863), 1016.
MemberMay 2, 2021 at 10:22 pm
This is interesting re the locusts and where they were blown to:
 winds blowing E from the Med never reach the Gulf [of Aqaba] as a westerly wind, but as a northerly one blowing along the Arava southwards. Thus there could be no connection between the locusts and the Gulf of Aqaba.
Har-El, Menashe. The Sinai Journeys: The Route of the Exodus. New (English) and Revised Edition. San Diego, CA: Ridgefield, 1983.
Har-el was Professor of Historical Geography at Hebrew University and a member of the Israel Names Commission for most of his long professional life. The Commission decides the names of sites in the land from biblical and extra-biblical data. His 1968 (Hbw) and 1983 (Eng) book (Sinai Journeys, above) is a masterful survey of the main theories regarding the Israelite journeys in the wilderness. This was before Anati proposed Har Karkom. But the Arabian candidates were already known, so he also examines them from a geographical point of view.
Log in to reply.