Moses parting the Red Sea
- Thread starter Jazzy
- Start date
atpollard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2017
- Messages
- 2,573
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Baptist
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
“It is a fictional story written during the Babylonian captivity bolster a national origin mythology. There are no such thing as ‘miracles’ because there is no ‘invisible unicorn’.”
- best Scientific Explanation
- best Scientific Explanation
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
Red Sea or Sea of Reeds? Where, exactly, did the Hebrews cross?
The Old Testament states it was Yam Suph. "Yam" = sea, "Suph" = reeds. The Sea of Reeds. This body of water is mentioned often in the Old Testament and clearly is not what the Greeks called the Red Sea. An entirely different body of water.
So, how did this get changed to Red Sea? Well, blame the unknown translators of the Hebrew OT into Greek, the Septuagint (the LXX). They translated "Suph" as reed but translated Yam Suph as "Red Sea." No one knows why... but some feel that there was a Jewish TRADITION or opinion that the Hebrews crossed what the Greeks called "The Red Sea" and so simply wrote "red" rather than "reed." Substituting the tradition for the Hebrew text.
This was controversial among both early Jews and Christians. Jews usually rejected the LXX substitution on this point, but early Christians were more divided. St. Augustine for example argued that the GREEK translation was the inerrant, inspired text (not the Hebrew original) and thus held that the Hebrews crossed what the Greeks called "The Red Sea." St. Jerome held that BOTH were equally inerrant and inspired but could not explain the inconsistency. But he translated the OT into Latin with the word "Red" so that the Latin Vulgate Bible (THE standard translation for many centuries) says "The Red Sea." This was the basis for the English King James Version in 1611 and so that is what is known to English speakers. Today, most Western translations say "Red Sea" following the LXX and Latin Vulgate translations (but usually with a footnote indicating the text says "Sea of Reeds"). The Hebrew actually says "Sea of Reeds" - and entirely different body of water.
None of this changes the story or the miracle. Theologically, matters not. Whether it was 5,000 feet of water or 50, either way it was a miracle - sufficient to drown the Egyptians, either way God saved His people.
.
The Old Testament states it was Yam Suph. "Yam" = sea, "Suph" = reeds. The Sea of Reeds. This body of water is mentioned often in the Old Testament and clearly is not what the Greeks called the Red Sea. An entirely different body of water.
So, how did this get changed to Red Sea? Well, blame the unknown translators of the Hebrew OT into Greek, the Septuagint (the LXX). They translated "Suph" as reed but translated Yam Suph as "Red Sea." No one knows why... but some feel that there was a Jewish TRADITION or opinion that the Hebrews crossed what the Greeks called "The Red Sea" and so simply wrote "red" rather than "reed." Substituting the tradition for the Hebrew text.
This was controversial among both early Jews and Christians. Jews usually rejected the LXX substitution on this point, but early Christians were more divided. St. Augustine for example argued that the GREEK translation was the inerrant, inspired text (not the Hebrew original) and thus held that the Hebrews crossed what the Greeks called "The Red Sea." St. Jerome held that BOTH were equally inerrant and inspired but could not explain the inconsistency. But he translated the OT into Latin with the word "Red" so that the Latin Vulgate Bible (THE standard translation for many centuries) says "The Red Sea." This was the basis for the English King James Version in 1611 and so that is what is known to English speakers. Today, most Western translations say "Red Sea" following the LXX and Latin Vulgate translations (but usually with a footnote indicating the text says "Sea of Reeds"). The Hebrew actually says "Sea of Reeds" - and entirely different body of water.
None of this changes the story or the miracle. Theologically, matters not. Whether it was 5,000 feet of water or 50, either way it was a miracle - sufficient to drown the Egyptians, either way God saved His people.
.
Last edited: