Fwd: [b-hebrew] Re: g(r Psa. 106:9 - exorcism? (B. M. Rocine)

Peter Kirk peterkirk at qaya.org
Thu Dec 16 17:56:49 EST 2004


On 16/12/2004 19:20, Jim West wrote:

> At 02:14 PM 12/16/2004, you wrote:
>
>> Legends endure, and among the working cast and slaves Yam Soph really 
>> looked
>> like the end of the world from where the sit.  Many thought of escape 
>> and the
>> reply was always "That's the end of the world.'"  If you examine the 
>> southern
>> shores of the Great Sea you will see a bay at the beginning of the 
>> Red Sea,
>> many reeds grow there and it would be deep enough that God could have 
>> performed
>> the miracle and drowned the Egyptians.  I lived near the Chesapeake 
>> Bay and
>> one year in the 70's a great wind blew all the water out of the bay 
>> so that one
>> could walk across.  Boats were docked on mud.  Three thousand five 
>> hundred
>> years ago the Great Sea had a much different shape then now.
>
>
> The problem with this naturalistic explanation, of course, is that the 
> author of Exodus makes it quite explicit that they walked across on 
> dry ground.  Dry ground, not mud.  The event can't be explained by 
> similar phenomena; Exodus makes sure of that.
>
The bottom of Chesapeake Bay was mud, at the point described. But if the 
bottom of the Yam Suph was rock, or gravel, or coral reef, or even firm 
sand, your objection fails. Don't argue from an incidental point in an 
imperfect analogy.

In fact Exodus makes it very clear that the surface that the Israelites 
walked on was the bottom of the Yam Suph, laid bare and dry by a strong 
wind. The timing was miraculous, of course, and perhaps the wind 
strength was as well. But there is no indication that there was anything 
miraculous about the surface, or that it was any drier than would be 
expected from the sea water receding from it.

-- 
Peter Kirk
peter at qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





More information about the b-hebrew mailing list