'Yam Suph' in the Exodus: Red Sea or Sea of Reeds?

A place to discuss matters of bygone times that are forgotten, but are recovered so that humanity is no longer condemned to repeat history as it so often does.

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Aisin
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:36 am
Location: Malaysia

'Yam Suph' in the Exodus: Red Sea or Sea of Reeds?

Post: # 6803Post Aisin »

The problem is that the biblical account never refers to the Red Sea by name. In fact, nowhere in the entire Old Testament Hebrew text is the body of water associated with the exodus ever called the "Red Sea." Instead in the Hebrew text the reference is to the yam suph. The word yam in Hebrew is the ordinary word for "sea," although in Hebrew it is used for any large body of water whether fresh or salt. The word suph is the word for "reeds" or "rushes," the word used in Ex. 2:3, 5 to describe where Moses' basket was placed in the Nile. So, the biblical reference throughout the Old Testament is to the "sea of reeds" (e.g., Num 14:25, Deut 1:40, Josh 4:23, Psa 106:7. etc.).
Quoted from: http://www.crivoice.org/yamsuph.html
User avatar
Psi
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 5:28 am
Location: Class M planet, outer Milky Way

Re: 'Yam Suph' in the Exodus: Red Sea or Sea of Reeds?

Post: # 6806Post Psi »

This, of course, is exactly what Thao told Michel - that it was the Sea of Reeds, not the Red Sea where the Egyptians chased the Jews.

I have heard that there are moves afoot to alter this mistranslation in future editions of the Bible. So far this is only hearsay - I have not been able to confirm this from any official source. Can anyone shed some light on this (including a URL)?
"The unexamined life is not worth living."
~ Socrates
dloheb
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:39 pm

Post: # 7043Post dloheb »

This is an interesting piece that I feel lends credibility to Michel. There are a lot of fine details strewn about in a very unique way in TP.
Vesko
Posts: 1086
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 5:13 pm

Post: # 7044Post Vesko »

It bolsters James Churchward's research as well. Here is what reads one of Churchward's books, "The Sacred Symbols of Mu", chapter 9, "Religion in Egypt and India", http://www.my-mu.com/ssm_html/e_ssm12.htm:
When the Israelites made their exodus from Egypt, they left Goshen which is a part of the Nile Delta, and, according to Egyptian records (papyrus), they crossed the "Sea of Reeds" and passed into Asia. The Sea of Reeds or rushes is situated at one of the mouths of the Nile. The water is very shallow and most of it can be waded without danger. [...] A mistranslation evidently occurs in the Bible. The Sea of Reeds was mistaken for the Red Sea. The Red Sea at the point where it is stated the Israelites crossed lies 200 miles from Goshen. The Sea of Reeds joined Goshen. To have crossed the Red Sea, the Israelites would have had to pass through 200 miles of enemy country, with an army in close pursuit, which means that they would have been overtaken and slain.
I wish Churchward was precise as to what the source of his information is, i.e. exactly which papyrus said so.
Do you REALLY practice meditation? If your REALLY do, do you practice a GOOD method? Are you sure this is REALLY so?
dloheb
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:39 pm

Post: # 7047Post dloheb »

Interesting

i'll start reading his stuff instead of being lazy :p
Post Reply