Archaeologists Discover Remains of Egyptian Army From the Biblical Exodus in Red Sea

Egypt's Antiquities Ministry announced this morning that a team of underwater archaeologists had discovered that remains of a large Egyptian army from the 14th century BC, at the bottom of the Gulf of Suez, 1.5 kilometers offshore from the modern city of Ras Gharib. The team was searching for the remains of ancient ships and artifacts related to Stone Age and Bronze Age trade in the Red Sea area, when they stumbled upon a gigantic mass of human bones darkened by age.

The scientists lead by Professor Abdel Muhammad Gader and associated with Cairo University's Faculty of Archaeology, have already recovered a total of more than 400 different skeletons, as well as hundreds of weapons and pieces of armor, also the remains of two war chariots, scattered over an area of approximately 200 square meters. They estimate that more than 5000 other bodies could be dispersed over a wider area, suggesting that an army of large size who have perished on the site.

i agree- (Which you’ll see if you go through my comments- I’ve made the same arguments you did here- I’m just stating what some have said- I think they are wrong- I do however think the people crossed on a fairly level, but deep area- not jagged rock- as they had carts, and it would have been quite rough going had it been over say coral outcroppings or rock formations- I believe God supernaturally dried the bed so that the carts and people could traverse it

another key point is that in order to get 2 million people across- at walking speed- in a day, or a few hours or whatever it was- folks have calculated the water path would have had to be very wide- single file at walking speed would have taken far too long- a few people wide- still taken too long- at walking speed- and some claim that it was hundreds of people wide (standing arm to arm- walking- large groups crossing at once- in order to get across in the time frame indicated in the bible)

If that is true- and I think it very likely to be true- then it was no mere wind parting shallow waters for a shot distance or width- it was a supernatural wind that ‘congealed’ the waters in a massive walls on both sides according to the bible- and htis wind dried the sea land so that carts and people could cross- on fairly flatish ground (Yes, I know large parties of people and carts have traversed very rugged mountain peaks as there were plenty of folks to lift wagons over rocks etc- but this would have all taken a fair bit of time- i believe the area they crossed was sandy- and if it was in the Aqaba gulf, then that area is known to be sand and sea grasses- fairly flat grounds-

Folks making the claim that the area was shallow, and in an area known as “The Reed Sea” ignore the fact that the army was drowned, and also ignore the fact that the wall of water was very large- the reeds area would have been even muckier- harder to dry out than sand, and the words used in the bible, yam suph, mean RED sea, not REED sea

As to the land bridge- We’re not talking a structure that goes to the top- or just under hte surface, as soem claim- there is a land bridge in the aqaba gulf- but it is 250 meters underwater- the gulf itself is over 800 meters deep in spots- The depth is 205 meters, and it is 800 meters wide- plenty wide for a massive group of peopel to cross

“The Gulf of Aqaba is a very deep channel of water ranging from 800-1800 meters in the middle. However at the Straits of Tiran, there is a natural land bridge so the deepest point the Israelites would encounter is only 205 meters.
The crossing at the Straits of Tiran is 18 km long and a natural land bridge provides for an 800 meters wide pathway the full distance of the crossing.”

http://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-exodus-route-goshen-red-sea.htm

[[I will say again, don’t question my faith. That’s between me and the Maker,]]

Well to be fair- you throw out your belief, which doesn’t jive with the majority of Christians, and insinuate that God bound Himself to natural laws and insinuate that miracles in the bible have natural explanations aqnd you also claim that there is ‘too much science to support young earth’- when you make claims like that your faith is no longer just between you and God- you’ve exposed you belief to the public for them to test whether what you claim is true or not- God infact tells us to test- compare, see if it be true- that is how we avoid false teachings or error-

You insinuated that the evidence shows long age earth- I pointed you to evidence that shows rapid creation, and there is plenty of scientific evidence that proves that evolution is an impossibility and there is plenty in the bible that states that God worked in supernatural ways- ways that can’t be explained naturally- The reason I’m bringing up evolution, is because if you believe everything has a natural explanation, then you can’t believe that God supernaturally created man out of the dust of the ground- or that He created all the creatures out of nothing- There is actually a lot of evidence that the world is young- and in order for God’s word to be true, then supernatural events need to be just that- supernatural- either the bible told the truth about God taking a rib from Adam and creating Eve, or it lied- Either Christ died and rose again or it was an elaborate hoax- either lazarus was factually dead, and rose again, supernaturally, or he didn’t-

When you state that you don’t believe in young earth- in a roundabout way you judge those that do- and you tried to solidify your judgment by claiming that there is ‘just too much evidence to support 6000 years’ - When you make claim like that it’s a direct confrontation of other people’s beliefs- something that you state that you don’t like to happen to you- You attempt to defend your belief by telling others it’s none of their business- but you don’t allow others to defend their belief? You come in questioning parts of the bible- and you expect noone to question you on your statements?

I asked a simple question about how you could possibly believe Jesus rose from the dead if you don’t believe God does supernatural things- you responded by getting defensive?- The God of the bible is big enough to supersede natural law- You question whether He does so or not- The bible is full of examples that He did- both Himself, and through His people- if he didn’t then the bible is nothing but myth, and cute little made up stories about fictional events- Either Jarius’ dead daughter was raised fro mthe dead- or it was just a parable or it ‘had some natural explanation’ that ‘does away with the need for a supernatural act to occur- hereby making the story as recorded in the bible into fiction, or at best nothign more than a metaphor-’

you made the claim that you are a ‘firm believer in God and the bible’ - and then doubt that supernatural events take place? Can you not see why that would cause folks to question that you are actually a ‘firm believer in the bible’? a statement like ‘I guess I would like to think that God’s miracles still confirm to God’s physical laws of the universe so that some physical explanation can be found’ indicates that you infact don’t take His word firmly, but rather only parts of His word- when you make a claim like that- you bring into question the validity of events that took place in the bible- and when you make claims that science shows that a young earth isn’t possible, you call into question the reasoning of those that believe in the science that shows there is a young earth-

Do you just expect to ‘hit and run’?

Wow, you Bible thumpers are what give Christians a bad name. You have practically preached a book about what you think I wrote and you have assumed positions I never took. I simply said that miracles are hard to rationalize with the physical world. It takes faith to accept them. It is perfectly acceptable to admit sometimes the physical world we know and the Biblical Truth dont reconcile without blind faith, something antithetical to scientists and engineers.

You think you have interpreted the Bible’s truth and your interpretation is more correct than mine and that questions I have remaining are some failing of my faith or even my very Christianity. LIke the other “preacher” earlier, you should be looking at your own actions and accusations before spending two seconds on someone you know nothing about.

If you were trying to show me the Christian ways, if I was not a Christian and you were trying to convince me of the value of Christianity, your lack of ability to discuss the subject of the article and my post without making me out to be a “false Christian” would definitely have me looking for another Church. I know the Church I attend doesn’t approach people, believers or not, in that manner.

I avoid this types of threads for this reason, but I made the mistake of actually airing a point of view on a public thread. Jeesh, some folks enjoy just looking for something to attack. Glad I was able to give you some joy tonight.

[[I simply said that miracles are hard to rationalize with the physical world.]]

Well no- that’s not what you ‘simply said’ - you made it appear that God was bound by natural law-

[[Jeesh, some folks enjoy just looking for something to attack.]]

no sir i don’t look for something to attack- you simply made some statements that appeared contrary to the word of God- I addressed them- Your words made it appear that you limited God to natural laws- and that you doubted some of God’s word-

[[It is perfectly acceptable to admit sometimes the physical world we know and the Biblical Truth dont reconcile without blind faith,]]

No arguments there- and IF that is what you meant- then you didn’t make that very clear in what you said- however, your first post made it appear you were sayign that God doesn’t perform supernatural events-

[[You think you have interpreted the Bible’s truth and your interpretation is more correct than mine and that questions I have remaining are some failing of my faith]]

Going by your first post, and the points you seemed to make?- Yes-

[[or even my very Christianity.]]

Nope- Never mentioned anything about your Christianity- Your faith? Yes- based on how you said what you said- I asked how you can believe Christ died for sins and rose again if you demote supernatural acts to natural acts- A person can be a Christian and not understand that the bible’s miracles are true- or even know about Christ rising from the dead- I was saved not knowing hardly anything about the bible- All i knew was that Christ was the way through which i had to be saved really- I didn’t understand how, but knew in my heart it was through Him- but I find it hard to comprehend how one would go about that I’ve never been in a position where I doubted that God works in supernatural ways- so i don’t understand it- it wasn’t a slam on you- nor me questioning your faith in Christ as God —

[[you should be looking at your own actions and accusations before spending two seconds on someone you know nothing about.]]

Oh i do- so don’t worry about that-

[[ your lack of ability to discuss the subject of the article and my post without making me out to be a “false Christian” would definitely have me looking for another Church.]]

I made you out to be a ‘false Christian’? I simply asked how you can reconcile questioning the supernatural miracles of the bible, such as Christ rising from the dead, with the statement that you are a ‘firm believer in the bible’ A person can be a believer in God, and yet be in error concerning His word- I never questioned your Christianity- I wouldn’t call a believer who has doubts and questions the foundations of Christian doctrine a ‘firm believer’- nor would i call them an unbeliever- as it’s possible to be saved and not understand things like that-

[[would definitely have me looking for another Church.]]

Well that would be up to you- the truth sometimes is too hard fro some to take-

[[you Bible thumpers are what give Christians a bad name]]

Nice- Have I called you childish names in this thread? and “We’re” the ones that give Christianity a bad name? Really? Why is that? Because I defend the fact that God is capable of supernatural acts? And because I point towards evidence that shows a young earth and the impossibilities of macro evolution? You made some contradictory sounding statements in your first post- then followed up with other contradictory posts to other members- then got defensive and started calling people names- Again, We’re the ones giving Christianity a bad name? You seem to be big on telling others to examine themselves, but it seems you don’t take your own advice-

[[It is perfectly acceptable to admit sometimes the physical world we know and the Biblical Truth dont reconcile without blind faith,]]

Had you made that clear in your first post- then all of this could have been avoided- All Christians can agree with that- however, you also included a slam against young earth Creationists- stating that there isn’t enough scientific evidence to support young earth- the fact is that there is plenty of evidence- either you are unaware of it or you choose not to believe it, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t factual and supportive of a young earth and scientifically sound

If there has been a profound misunderstanding- then I apologize- but I think your first post was fairly clear enough-

Th only somewhat accurate dating method is carbon- however- it is only ‘accurate’ out to around 8000 years or so-

I had a link that discussed all the major forms of dating materials, and showed how each one had serious flaws- and had another link showing how scientists would throw out results that didn’t jive with their long age agenda- and only keep the results that supposedly showed a long age- I used to get into the evo/creation debates way back when- and did a lot of research on these issues because inevitably an evo or long age creationist would claim that ‘the science shows that short age earth isn’t accurate’- I also kept notes on the impossibilities of macro evolution- biological, mathematical, physical, thermodynamic, chemical impossibilities- and had loads of notes on irreducible complexity-

I’ll see if i can find the errors in age dating methods- There is a ton of evidence refuting macro evo claims, and plenty of evidence showing young age AND a need for an intelligent designer if folks would just be willing to at the very least- put some time into objectively researching the two issues-

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.