"The Exodus Revealed" Video II

Thank you, jar, for scanning the petroglyph and posting it.Now, how would you like it if I took the same attitude of some of your buddies on this forum and said, "Pictures don't prove a thing!"Do you know how STUPID those people sound when they say things like that? Yet it happens over, and over, and over --The TRUTH of the matter is that it is IMPORTANT for us to look at pictures of archaeological sites and petroglyphs, etc.! That's the only way to try to understand what is going on, it's one of the legitimate forms of archaeological investigation.I've forwarded the pic to a friend for his assessment (but not to Lennart Moller) -- but I hope you realize that we would also need to know the exact location of this petroglyph, plus study the surrounding area to see what else is in the area around it -- then after being able to do this, then we can write a reply to it.Several people have been to the Jebel el Lawz site to photograph the entire area -- until we've inspected your site, we can't comment.BTW, did the book include OUR PETROGLYPHS?I bet it didn't!And if it didn't, what is that telling you?Could it be that the Saudis don't want people investigating Jebel el Lawz?Could it be that they don't want to share it with Christians or Jews because then Christians and Jews would want to GO THERE to this possible Mt. Sinai site?SHOW ME THE PICS OF OUR SITE IN YOUR ROCK ART BOOK!Our site has been known to them since 1984 when Ron Wyatt first showed it to them (and then in 1985 they had put up the chain link fences around the area) --SHOW ME OUR PETROGLYPHS IN THE ROCK ART BOOK!

Brian, you misquoted Exodus 14:2 -- you wrote: " "Tell the Israelites to turn back and encamp near Pi Hahiroth..." -- when Exodus 14:2 says NOTHING about turning "back" to Egypt, it says, "that they TURN and encamp before Pihahiroth"!It just says "turn," which means turning in either direction -- the text does NOT say that they "turned back to Egypt"!Regarding Numbers 33, yes, Etham is mentioned twice -- and on the map that Ron had me draw for him back in 1992, he placed Etham as an area that wrapped around the top of the Gulf of Aqaba, so it was technically on BOTH sides of the Gulf of Aqaba. It was a REGION, not a city. Which means that the Hebrews encountered it first before they crossed the gulf, and then encountered "the wilderness of Etham" (verse 8) AFTER they crossed the Gulf of Aqaba!Reagarding a body of water being northward of the top of Suez, there never was a body of water there that would qualify as being "the heart of the sea" (Ex. 15:8) -- and the term "great deep" is repeatedly used for the crossing site, so there is no way that Pharoah's army was drowned in a 2-foot deep "Sea of Reeds"! That wouldn't be "the great deep"! (Isaiah 51:10, 63:11-13, Nehemiah 9:11, Ex.15:5,8).As we've been saying for 20 years, the only route that makes sense and matches the biblical description is Ron's Exodus route (especially since your route only takes people to St. Catherine's mountain, a place that has zero evidence for being Mt. Sinai) -- Galatians 4:25 says that Mt. Sinai is "in Arabia" -- the land of Midian -- and that land is currently known as Saudi Arabia!

Sorry, I've got to go back to calling him jar jar -- he posted this brilliant statement: "There is no vast conspiricy to subvert what you have found, only immense disinterest and boredom."Are you a complete moron?Every person who has ever gone to the Jebel el Lawz's site has come back telling people that the Saudis do NOT want anybody there!!Are you calling these people liars, jar jar?Let me say it for you in words that a grade school child can understand:The Saudis hate Jews and Christians, and since this site might be Mt. Sinai, AND THEY KNOW IT, the Saudis won't let any Jewish or Christian archaeologists go there!Boy, for being so smart you guys are really, really ignorant of the reality of the situation!In the history of archaeology, ONLY 5 GROUPS OF PEOPLE have ever visited that site -- Ron Wyatt, the Caldwells, and Cornuke/Williams, a lady named Vivica, and a fellow from England named Aaron Sen -- and NOBODY ever gets "permission" from the Saudi government to go there!NOBODY!

None of those verses say that they turned/returned to Egypt!I use the King James Bible, it just says "turn" -- so "turn back" is an assumption of the translators, because "turning" could mean to turn to either side, or to turn back --But I'll guarantee that it NEVER meant that they returned to Egypt! How can I prove this?Exodus 14:11 -- "And they said unto Moses, Because there were no graves in Egypt, hast thou taken us away to die IN THE WILDERNESS? wherefore hast thou dealt thus with us, TO CARRY US FORTH OUT OF EGYPT?"Do you see, guys? THEY WERE OUT OF EGYPT!!Therefore the crossing site is in NOT IN EGYPT, nor is it on the border of Egypt! It is OUTSIDE OF EGYPT!Go ahead, use whichever translation you wish -- this verse clearly shows that they did NOT return to Egypt, and when Pharaoh caught them they were OUT OF EGYPT -- they were at the Gulf of Aqaba!This message has been edited by JimSDA, 08-06-2004 05:32 PM

The verse only says they turned back to "Phihahiroth, between Migol and the sea" -- it DOESN'T say they returned to Egypt!And later in Ex 14:11 it says they were talking about being trapped by Pharoah and they were OUTSIDE OF EGYPT!

Thanks for posting the maps, Lysimachus!

Yaro, then you need to prove that they were some place else!As far as we care, we've proved we are right!This message has been edited by JimSDA, 08-06-2004 08:56 PM

Charles clarifies his insults: "I would like it to be known that I don't consider all creationists to bullshitters - only those who carry on with such nonsense like this."Amazing, he still insists that a very intelligent scientist named Lennart Moller, who works with the people who hand out the Nobel Prize in medicine, is nothing but a "bullshitter" --Again, my dear Charles, this is why no one will enter into your debate challenge -- because of your obvious bias against listening to any of the evidence or our interpretation of the evidence, and the degree to which to are willing to insult and mock people.Creationists can provide the names of hundreds of scientists who believe the Bible, but you block all that out -- you don't want to listen to it -- you just don't want "God" to figure into science.I feel very sorry for you -- terribly so -- because until you get to the point of realizing that God is REAL, you are just not seeing the whole picture.You need to get in touch with a scientist that you can talk with face-to-face who can tell you how he knows that God is real -- you really need to overcome this locked mind set that repeats this negative mantra in your head -- there are scientists in all sorts of fields who acknowledge the existence of God!Science can only take you so far -- then, as all these scientists have realized, there's a point at which you can go no further with science, and God is there to supply the answers.Come on, Charles -- push it a little further -- dig a little deeper -- pay attention to Michael Behe's "Darwin's Black Box" -- and maybe then you will understand how Lennart Moller can look at the TONS of evidence that he has for the Exodus site and how he can easily come to the conclusion that everything he sees tells him that it perfectly matches the Bible story of the Exodus.Try to grow beyond the "bullshitter" mind set, because frankly the "bullshit" is the bias that is inside your own head -- why not try flushing it out and try growing as a true scientist who honestly acknowledges that God is the ONLY true source for the ultimate answers in science? If you honestly respect science, then you will do some honest delving into its depths.

Buzsaw -- I think you guys have done your best to share the Exodus material with these folks. But as is with these types of message threads, certain nay-sayers on these forums consider it their "life's mission" to shoot down anything and everything you post --I used to work briefly for the late Carl Sagan when I lived in DC in 1987, and in his "Demon Haunted World" book he observed that the field of science is often a field based upon rudeness and one-upmanship wherein "the Quickest Gun in the West" Syndrome often prevails -- that's where other scientists immediately try to do their best to "shoot down" any new idea -- they think it's "normal" and acceptible behavior, which is how these people on this forum have also behaved -- but it's just normal fallen human being behavior.There's really not much hope to win over any of these people who have posted and reposted their negative opinions -- if anyone was truly interested in what we've posted, those people would privately contact you to carry on a private conversation that can happen without the obnoxious posters interferring! The person would do it like Nichodemus did when he privately approached Jesus without any of the other pharisees around --You folks have done a good job of attempting to share the Exodus material with these folks -- but you will never succeed on these forums -- but hopefully a few "lurkers" WILL be impressed with what you have shared, but I think that they will be few and far between!It's unfortunate, but it's the world we live in.

schrafinator wrote: "the researchers you are referencing can think of no other explanations for how the evidence appears as it does?"We fully expect people to offer alternative interpretations -- that is normal and acceptible -- but at the same time there is a point reached when the alternative ideas are just being STUBBORN and FOOLISH DIVERSIONS that are nothing but persistent sorry attempts at disagreeing!Sure, if we only had the evidence of coral shapes as our "only" evidence, then you folks would be OK in ripping them apart -- but we don't just have the coral objects, WE HAVE EVERYTHING MENTIONED IN THE ENTIRE EXODUS STORY! We have the route, we have the crossing site, we have a Mt. Sinai that has evidence of everything written in the biblical account --Which is why the insistent "alternative ideas" just don't wash.You guys are ignoring TOO MUCH evidence just so you can be contrary -- and if you choose to be contrary about "all" the evidence, then you're just being blind and should honestly admit you're biased and you have no intention of ever accepting any evidence that proves the Bible.

Last night I re-watched the 90-minute interview that I have on video of Lennart Moller appearing on 4 TV programs of "Prophecy in the News" where he answered questions and talked about his Exodus book and video. I watched to see if there was anything there that might answer any of your guys' questions --Moller said he has travelled a lot, he said he'd been to 60 countries -- he described how difficult it was to dive in the Gulf of Aqaba (as anyone who has been there will tell you) -- he discussed how the name "Red Sea" is really not in the Bible, it's just a poor translation of "yam suph" --One very interesting point he mentioned was that Solomon kept his fleet of ships in the "yam suph" -- which HAD to be the northern area of the Gulf of Aqaba -- so the "yam suf" of the Gulf of Aqaba is also the "yam suph" where the crossing happened!Why would Solomon keep his fleet over in the Gulf of Suez??Nope, Solomon's fleet was in the "yam suph" -- the Gulf of Aqaba!Moller also explained that we do not know exactly how deep the landbridge is in its deeper section -- but there is an obvious beach-area land extension on both sides of the gulf there at the Nuweiba beach area.Accept it or don't -- it's your choice.

jar asked this question: "Why would they want to prove one of their own prophets wrong or hide evidence that supports their own prophets?"Quit thinking like an open-minded American!The Moslems already "KNOW" that they are right about their prophets, they don't need any verification done to know that Moses was a prophet of God and that Mt. Sinai is in Saudi Arabia!It's just that they REFUSE to do anything to help either Christians or Jews support their belief systems! WHICH IS WHY THEY WON'T LET US IN TO DOCUMENT OR STUDY JEBEL EL LAWZ!BTW, how long do you think you would last in a Moslem culture believing your atheistic beliefs? You'd be DEAD, that's what you'd be!We are dealing with a very touchy, very difficult situtaion with trying to verify anything that is in Saudi Arabia -- so if you want to get mad at somebody, stop getting mad at US because we share this Exodus information with you, get mad at the Saudis who won't let archaeologists into their country to study the site and settle the issue!

jar, the Rock at Horeb is a very unique rock -- there are no other 5-story tall split boulders in Saudi Arabia near the Jebel el Lawz site -- and this has been shared with you on ALL our websites and in Moller's book and video, ALL of which you just don't seem to want to pay attention to!The rock is UNIQUE, it is UNLIKE any other huge boulders in the area!It is on the back side of Mt. Sinai, EXACTLY where the biblical story tells us that it was!It has obvious water erosion signs that millions of gallons of water flowed over its base, YET IT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A "DESERT" AREA THAT GETS VERY LITTLE RAINFALL!Again, what we told you this on our websites --Do more tests on it? Sure -- we'd love to -- except that the Saudis won't let anybody in there to do it!!!We can clearly identify it as the Rock at Horeb -- you don't have to believe us, you can believe anything you wish.This message has been edited by JimSDA, 08-07-2004 11:28 AM

jar jar writes: "You did not answer my question. If you could prove that Mt. Sinai was in Saudi Arabia that would simply add one more holy site to the existing list."Are you really that dumb?MT. SINAI UPHOLDS THE "JEWS" VICTORY OVER THE EGYPTIANS!MT. SINAI UPHOLDS THE JEWISH LAW OVER THE MOSLEM LAW!MT. SINAI IS A !!!!JEWISH!!!! VICTORY STORY!!Why are you being so dense about this?The Saudis are afraid that the Jews would want to reclaim the site!!!This message has been edited by JimSDA, 08-07-2004 11:33 AM

jar: "What are the obvious signs of water erosion that are different from wind erosion and heat cracks?"The water erosion "flows" down over the base rocks just like water would flow -- wind cannot "blow" in that area to erode the stone, wind would mainly effect the edges of rocks!This erosion is obviously water erosion.I would post pictures if I knew how to do it here .....