deank

Well, I'm finally back in college. In one of my classes today (history), the professor stated that scientists had an explanation for the parting of the Red Sea. So far she has cited the Zoarostrian influence on the Jews during their captivity in Babylon, as well as other bits and pieces that don't lead me to believe she's biased towards any faith or another. In fact, we are spending much more time on Hinduism which she seems to like.

So, after beating around the bush for a while, has anyone heard of this scientific explanation for the parting of the Red Sea? I tried searching for an explanation online but wading through the propoganda was getting a little tiresome.

-Dean

Jayhawker Soule

Although it's hard to be certain based on your brief description, any history teacher who tosses out some comment asserting that "scientists had an explanation for the parting of the Red Sea" should be teaching New Age Pottery at some cult center.

Asha'man

The only thing I have heard is that the "Red Sea" is actually the "Reed Sea," which is a much shallower body of water. With a strong constant wind, the water may have been pushed to one end, leaving a crossable point.

Personally, I think it is pure myth, but some people try to turn these things into less extreme miracles for some reason.

Jayman

I've heard that a certain part of the Red Sea will "part" when a strong wind blows over the Sea. However, it would be a major coincidence for all the Israelites to pass through while the Egyptians were drowned. Therefore, I don't think there is a scientific explanation for the parting of the Red Sea (which should be translated Reed Sea).

Thor Q. Mada

Since the Red Sea is a major water way and the entry to the Suez Canal, It would be seriously inconvenient (to say the least) for the waters to part from time to time.
Trust me, they don't.

Athiestpotato

Just a thought I had while studying that section in a class last semester. Since the passage is most accuratly translated as "Sea of Reeds" I started thinking about "Seas of Reeds". The only imagry I could come up with was one of a bog or a swamp. So thus my theory goes. Assuming that the story happened in any way similar to the account. The band of ex-slaves ran for a swamp where they could lose the army. Once in the swamp the Isrealites who were on foot were able to nimbly work their way through the area where as the much more weighed down army was quickly trapped by their own armour and the swamp.

Just a fanciful theory with no actual proof that I am aware of to back it up.

[ June 12, 2002: Message edited by: Athiestpotato ]</p>

Liquidrage

As anyone shown outside of the Bible that the Isrealites were ever even slaves in Egpyt and thus possibly ran away from them through some body of water?

I could be wrong but last I knew outside of the Bible there was no evidence for this.

ShottleBop

According to Richard Elliott Friedman in his recent translation of, and commentary on, the Torah, the reference is to the eastern arm of the Red Sea (now known as the Gulf of Eilat or the Gulf of Aqaba): "There is . . . no doubt that the body of water that is pictured in the story of the splitting of the sea in the Torah is the body of water that is known in English as the Red Sea."

That said, the Bible story itself does not tell of a miraculous, near-instantaneous parting of the waters, as depicted in film: Exodus 14:21 describes a strong east wind that blew "all night" to turn the sea into dry ground. If it happened, it could have been a natural phenomenon that was attributed by the Jews to divine action.

Kosh

Yeap. Science in the form of archeology has shown that there is little basis for the stories of the patriarchs and exodus in the OT. All signs indicate that the books were written during the reign of King Josiah in the 7th century BCE (see the thread on "Bible Unearthed" in this forum. Since there is no evidence (and there should be plenty) for the exodus in either archeology or in the records of ancient Egypt, it's much easier to realize that the Red Sea story was simply made up, rather than try to jump through hoops looking for a scientific explanation for an actual event.

Bruce Wildish

The story of the parting of the Red Sea is based on a popular ancient myth of Babylonian origin known among scholars as the combat myth. In this myth one god (the hero or protagonist - usually a storm god or creator god of special note) defeats another who represents the forces of chaos and disorder. This chaos god is portrayed by the image of tumultuous, dark waters. The hero god defeats the chaos god by splitting the latter in two and creates the new order from the remains, i.e. God divides the waters.

The Hebrew version is based on a Cannanite version in which the storm god Baal defeats the chaos god of the sea Yamm (this is why the Hebrew word for the Sea of Reeds, i.e. the Red Sea, is Yam suph). In the original Babylonian version from which this story derives it is Marduk who defeats Tiamat. The creation story of Genesis 1 has the same motif - dividing the waters in order to usher in creation (copied from a Babylonian story called Enuma Elis) - and its word for the watery chaos that God divides is based on the name Tiamat (tehom).

Note that this motif of the parting of the waters reappears in Joshua (he divides the Jordan) and in the stories of Elijah and Elisha (they also divide the Jordan).