The Science of the Red Sea's Parting

[Doug1029]

There are indeed some legends in the Bible but usually they are used as allegories to be interpreted with the purpose to teach a moral lesson.

There are parables attributed to Jesus and the Book of Job may be a parable. These are literary devices, included to illustrate a point, and should not be considered mistakes or attempts to deceive. But there are numerous just plain mistakes, like miscounting the number of cities in a list, or the differences in the Ten Commandments as listed in Numbers 34 versus the versions listed in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. And there are numerous verses whose meanings are diametrically opposed to each other. Some errors disappear upon closer inspection - they turn out to be plausible.

The Bible authors did not intend to deceive. They were telling of events the way they believed they happened. The question for us should be: what were they describing?

I have read all the works of Josephus and do not remember to have read about him, the Jewish man Josephus, referring to the Jews as a bunch of leprous ex-slaves. I remember to have read about this but from an anti-Jewish Egyptian writer but, then again, what's new? Isn't almost the whole world anti-Semite?

You misunderstood. Josephus was insisting in "Against Apion" if memory serves, that the Israelites were NOT a bunch of leprous ex-slaves. It is the Bible that says they were. I was using that as an illustration that Josephus is not always right.

There's another case where Josephus describes the city of Meroe as being at the junction of the White Nile, Blue Nile and Atbara Rivers. He even describes the fortifications. But the Atbara joins the Nile a hundred miles from the junction of the two Niles. Was Josephus wrong?

Yet there is a place where his description works. The Temple of Hatshepsut at el Bahari once had gardens and artificial rivers designed to illustrate the Egyptian version of paradise - the Land of Punt. But it's a model - the rivers are only a few yards apart. And Josephus' description fits. Josephus' source was describing Hatshepsut's temple and Josephus thought he meant the real-life city of Meroe.

Josephus describes how an invasion force, led by Djehuty, whom Josephus thinks was a prototypical Moses, travels up a tributary of the Nile (The description fits Wadi Korosko.), uses ibexes to eliminate a hazard posed by poisonous snakes and then outflanks the Egyptians who had set up an ambush at the Fourth Cataract (The description fits Napata, except for the detail that Napata was not fortified in Djehuty's day. Djehuty became the ibex-headed god Djehuti in Egyptian mythology and was added to the Moses story in Jewish mythology - truly an exceptional man.

Josephus also names the renegade Pharaoh Amenmesses (whom he calls "Messui") as another Moses prototype. SO: two Moses prototypes discovered by Josephus. Is he right both times? I think he is. If the Moses story is a conflation of events, a legend, it will fit in both places.

True that a great multitude took advantage of the Jewish Exodus to mount the wagon so to speak and free themselves from slavery in Egypt. I guess that's what made Moses' life so terrible to live.

Moses was an ex-general with trained soldiers at his command ("Messui" may even have fought in Canaan against some of the very people he was now trying to lead.).

That's not what is written in Numb. 22:4. They were worried that the Israelites, passing through their land, would devour every thing like grasshoppers.

That's one interpretation.

That's not what is in there. Abraham was not a Syrian but a man from Ur in Chaldea aka Babylon.

The Bible refers to him both as Syrian and Aramaen. The difference is probably minimal anyway.

What would be a good source to write one's history? The text is about the history of the People in their trip through the desert.

My list contains 139 references. And that's only a beginning. You'll have to do a literature search.

Doug

[Doug1029]

The information in Josephus about lepers comes from his supposed quotes from Manetho, the Egyptian priest-historian. No one knows to what degree Josephus might have misquoted or misinterpreted Manetho, but it is actually Manetho who writes of Moses as originally a leprous Egyptian priest cast off with other lepers who subsequently leads them in revolt against the pharaoh. It's a colorful tale but apparently with no real historicity behind it.

Maybe. But it fits into history if the events described occurred late in the reign of Horemheb. Piramesse, one of Horemheb's generals, was being groomed for the throne. Piramesse' son, Seti (to become Seti I), was detailed to build a city in northern Egypt (Piramesse, the biblical Ramses). Seti wanted to be privy to the counsels of the gods and was told he could do so by expelling "lepers and impure people" from Egypt. Seti thought the "impure people" meant "Asiatics" (Seti hated "Asiatics."). So he rounded up a bunch, including some priests. Then, needing workers to build the city, he decided to get some work out of them first. That's when Seti's soothsayer realized that a thirteen-year curse would descend on Egypt if any priests were harmed. Oops!

One of those priests became a sort of foreman between the Pharaoh and the work crews. He asked for permission to repair Avaris, the old Hyksos capital, which was almost wall-to-wall with Piramesse, as a place for the workers to live (The Bible describes the Israelites living close to the work site.). Permission was granted. The priest then sent word to Jerusalem offering to restore the old capital to its rightful owners if they would help overthrow the Egyptians. This they did and for thirteen years they "despoiled the Egyptians."

Eventually, Horemheb died and Piramesse took the throne as Ramses I. He lived fourteen months before dying of an ear infection. Seti then became Seti I.

Josephus provides enough information to identify Seti I. Seti's son was Ramses (Ramses II) and would have been about eight years old at the time of the rebellion.

There are some rough spots with the dates. Maybe the curse didn't last thirteen years; maybe Ramses was a little older or younger at the time.

Did it really happen that way? Who knows? But it could have.

Doug

[Doug1029]

The use of the words leprosy and leper is a mistranslation that occurred in antiquity when the scriptures were translated into Greek.

The masoretic Torah text introduce three variations of skin Tzaraath: (Se'eth, Sapachath and Bahereth). The Septuagint, a translation of the Hebrew Bible originally used by Greek speaking Jews and Gentile proselytes, translates the term Tzaraath with Greek lepra, from which the cognate "leprosy" was traditionally used in English Bibles. The classical Greek term lepra is primarily used only of skin discoloration and not rot and mildew. The JPS Tanakh translates it as a "scaly affection" in Leviticus 13:2.

Tzaraath is sufficiently dissimilar from leprosy to be considered a different disease altogether, albeit its coincidental translation in the Septuagint. For instance, tzaraath is not contagious between individuals, leprosy is slightly contagious. The metzora is barred from entering Israel's encampment (in the Torah) or the city of Jerusalem not because of contagiousness but because of ritual impurity

I get the impression that the Bible uses the term "leprosy" to mean any skin disease or infection.

Doug

[+Hammerclaw]

I get the impression that the Bible uses the term "leprosy" to mean any skin disease or infection.

Doug

Of course it does. The point is that people read the world leprosy and think of the contemporary affliction by that name. It's biblical meaning is for different diseases or conditions and also means outcast, or unclean.

[Ben Masada]

There are parables attributed to Jesus and the Book of Job may be a parable. These are literary devices, included to illustrate a point, and should not be considered mistakes or attempts to deceive. But there are numerous just plain mistakes, like miscounting the number of cities in a list, or the differences in the Ten Commandments as listed in Numbers 34 versus the versions listed in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. And there are numerous verses whose meanings are diametrically opposed to each other. Some errors disappear upon closer inspection - they turn out to be plausible.

The Bible authors did not intend to deceive. They were telling of events the way they believed they happened. The question for us should be: what were they describing?

You misunderstood. Josephus was insisting in "Against Apion" if memory serves, that the Israelites were NOT a bunch of leprous ex-slaves. It is the Bible that says they were. I was using that as an illustration that Josephus is not always right.

There's another case where Josephus describes the city of Meroe as being at the junction of the White Nile, Blue Nile and Atbara Rivers. He even describes the fortifications. But the Atbara joins the Nile a hundred miles from the junction of the two Niles. Was Josephus wrong?

Yet there is a place where his description works. The Temple of Hatshepsut at el Bahari once had gardens and artificial rivers designed to illustrate the Egyptian version of paradise - the Land of Punt. But it's a model - the rivers are only a few yards apart. And Josephus' description fits. Josephus' source was describing Hatshepsut's temple and Josephus thought he meant the real-life city of Meroe.

Josephus describes how an invasion force, led by Djehuty, whom Josephus thinks was a prototypical Moses, travels up a tributary of the Nile (The description fits Wadi Korosko.), uses ibexes to eliminate a hazard posed by poisonous snakes and then outflanks the Egyptians who had set up an ambush at the Fourth Cataract (The description fits Napata, except for the detail that Napata was not fortified in Djehuty's day. Djehuty became the ibex-headed god Djehuti in Egyptian mythology and was added to the Moses story in Jewish mythology - truly an exceptional man.

Josephus also names the renegade Pharaoh Amenmesses (whom he calls "Messui") as another Moses prototype. SO: two Moses prototypes discovered by Josephus. Is he right both times? I think he is. If the Moses story is a conflation of events, a legend, it will fit in both places.

Moses was an ex-general with trained soldiers at his command ("Messui" may even have fought in Canaan against some of the very people he was now trying to lead.).

That's one interpretation.

The Bible refers to him both as Syrian and Aramaen. The difference is probably minimal anyway.

My list contains 139 references. And that's only a beginning. You'll have to do a literature search.

Doug

Well Doug, all I can say this time is to commend you for your brilliant research. That's a beautiful piece of History. Ah! I have something to say about you reporting that Abraham was also referred to as a Syrian. This might be a reference to his extended family who left Ur of the Chaldeans and decided to remain in Padan Aram

of Syria while Abraham with his nephew Lot continued the voyage to Canaan where they parted from each other; Lot to Sodom and Abraham to Beersheba.

[Doug1029]

Well Doug, all I can say this time is to commend you for your brilliant research. That's a beautiful piece of History. Ah! I have something to say about you reporting that Abraham was also referred to as a Syrian. This might be a reference to his extended family who left Ur of the Chaldeans and decided to remain in Padan Aram

of Syria while Abraham with his nephew Lot continued the voyage to Canaan where they parted from each other; Lot to Sodom and Abraham to Beersheba.

The source for the "Syrian" info is the King James Version - maybe not the best source, in this case.

Not really on the subject, but: There was a little-bitty cross-roads town about twenty miles from my hometown by the name of Padanaram. There's nothing but a few picnic tables there now, part of a state park. A couple hundred yards to the east is Padanaram Island - the Ohio-Pennsylvania runs right across it. It's a beautiful place.

Doug

[Shibolet]

Non-believers typically dismiss the miracles described in the Bible as fiction or metaphor. But according to research, at least one of those supposed impossibilities - the parting of the Red Sea to make way for Moses and the fleeing Israelites - perhaps could have happened.

http://www.smithsoni...ting-180953553/

It did happened no doubt but, since God never operates a miracle without the participation of the one who needs the miracle. It has come to my mind that, when Prophet Isaiah was prophesying about the return of the Jews from Babylon, he faced the problem that most the People had lost their interest to return to the Land of Israel and, one of the reasons was that it was not worth starting all over from scratch. Then, they had lost the trust that God would act as He did to open the Red Sea so that the People could cross. Then, Isaiah, to persuade them to return, revealed the secret that the People themselves had been the ones who had dried up the sea and that the Lord, so to speak, would only help so that things went smooth. (Isa. 51:9,10) How did they do it? After 430 years in Egypt building all sort of dams on the delta of the River Nile, they had surely become experts at it. Moses himself was scared between the sea and the Egyptians and stood there pleading with the Lord about what to do, when the Lord said unto him, "What are you crying unto Me about? Use your "rod" aka authority and get the people to go, aka to do the work!" That's when all those who knew how, the built a dam in a way to be demolished easily. In fact, as soon as the People had crossed they destroyed the dam.