Hey Kev, I've seen this before, and other stuff originating from Ron Wyatt. As much as I'd like to believe it's true, it seems he has a tainted history and that Christian research organizations like AIG have questioned his findings.
According to a rabbi whose knowledge of the original Hebrew I have great confidence in, and who has studied how archaeological evidence fits the Biblical account, rather than vice versa, Ramesses could not have been the pharaoah of the Exodus. More likely, the Exodus took place at the end of the Middle Kingdom. Ramesses had armies all over Palestine, whereas during the period of the Judges, and the early Davidic kingdom, there was nary an Egyptian to be seen. Ahab is a more likely contemporary of Ramesses. As to the crossing of the sea, the very term "Red Sea" is a mistranslation. It was indeed the Sea of Reeds, and there is plenty of opportunity for a heavily armored cavalry, or army of chariots, to be mired and dragged under in such terrain. That doesn't mean God did nothing, its just a perfectly appropriate site for what God did. I have never heard before of any claim that Sinai was not in the Sinai.
Check out more information at ArkDiscovery.com archeology
4 comments:
I haven't critically examined the findings but have had them described to me. They seem worthy of investigation.
Hence the "maybe" in my above.
Kev
The guy has some "unique" theological ideas... but there is some neat stuff on his site none the less.
Kev
Hey Kev, I've seen this before, and other stuff originating from Ron Wyatt. As much as I'd like to believe it's true, it seems he has a tainted history and that Christian research organizations like AIG have questioned his findings.
see: here and here.
Rachel and I are gearing up for a second run of our apologetics series so I love this kind of information if the source is reliable.
According to a rabbi whose knowledge of the original Hebrew I have great confidence in, and who has studied how archaeological evidence fits the Biblical account, rather than vice versa, Ramesses could not have been the pharaoah of the Exodus. More likely, the Exodus took place at the end of the Middle Kingdom. Ramesses had armies all over Palestine, whereas during the period of the Judges, and the early Davidic kingdom, there was nary an Egyptian to be seen. Ahab is a more likely contemporary of Ramesses. As to the crossing of the sea, the very term "Red Sea" is a mistranslation. It was indeed the Sea of Reeds, and there is plenty of opportunity for a heavily armored cavalry, or army of chariots, to be mired and dragged under in such terrain. That doesn't mean God did nothing, its just a perfectly appropriate site for what God did. I have never heard before of any claim that Sinai was not in the Sinai.
Post a Comment