The reed sea is the lake of Tanis.They likely went around those places. Note where they crossed the "Red" (Reed) Sea.
View attachment 639302
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The reed sea is the lake of Tanis.They likely went around those places. Note where they crossed the "Red" (Reed) Sea.
View attachment 639302
Most bible students understand that the Israelites crossed the "sea of reeds", or the Reed Sea.The reed sea is the lake of Tanis.
Just for information’s sake, they didn’t cross the sea, they walked in a semi-circle in order to see the dead Egyptians.They likely went around those places. Note where they crossed the "Red" (Reed) Sea.
View attachment 639302
I know. Yam Suf is lake TanisMost bible students understand that the Israelites crossed the "sea of reeds", or the Reed Sea.
Did Moses cross the Reed Sea or the Red Sea?
Moses parting the Red Sea: analysis. Everyone knows the story of Moses parting the Red Sea so that he and the Israelites can escape the Egyptians. Except that this isn’t what the Bible says. The original Hebrew text instead states that Moses parted the waters of Yam Sūph, which is Hebrew for ‘sea of reeds’. It was a Reed Sea rather than the Red Sea
The region of Migdol, as shown on the map, was their crossing point.
Exodus 14:
1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, that they turn and encamp before Pihahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over against Baalzephon: before it shall ye encamp by the sea.
The Bible says humans do not have the authority to change God's word. I suppose the ancients had a time period from the transcription. Today, they may write articles and such, but they do not change the scripture.The problem is that the futurists and fundamentalists change scripture and then nothing makes sense.
Lol. This is just worthless opinion from a SAF and POS.Here's something very simple which will dispel anything in the bible as history.
Immaculate conception and virgin births etc , dead men walking, resurrections, turning a woman into a block of salt yet you have the ignorance to suggest that is history??
You're barking mad
Jesus is not the suffering servant in Isaiah.The Bible says humans do not have the authority to change God's word. I suppose the ancients had a time period from the transcription. Today, they may write articles and such, but they do not change the scripture.
As I understand it, the original documents were lost so can only go by the past time period.
Do you have evidence to the contrary or can we chalk it up to another LIE from you?
The Bible says humans do not have the authority to change God's word. I suppose the ancients had a time period from the transcription. Today, they may write articles and such, but they do not change the scripture.
As I understand it, the original documents were lost so can only go by the past time period.
Do you have evidence to the contrary or can we chalk it up to another LIE from you?