Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen?

Where? Evidence? No Roman city at Nuweiba Beach that I am aware of. No Roman reason for a lone column on a beach.No Buldozers, blasting powder, and earthmovers to build a coastal highway through the mountainous terrain North and South of Nuweiba Beach, Jar. Who's more ignorant, Jar, apprised region savvy Wyatt audiences or Jar? Perhaps you can apprise the alleged ignorant on the timeframe of each civilized occupation and the extent of wilderness occupation and culture for each other than the role of nomadic herdsmen.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

You are of the impression that the Romans had these machines?

LOL, Bluescat. Both arms of the Red Sea were The Red Sea, so the Biblical Record does not designate, other than context, which arm the crossing took place. Context says they crossed into Midian which was in Arabia, clearly implying what is now known as The Gulf Of Aqaba.The NT also designates Arabia as the location of Mt Sinai. Tradition miss-named the Sinai Pinensula and miss-located Mt Sinai, contrary to the Biblical record and the evidence first discovered/pioneered by Ron Wyatt.Not only that, but the topography described in the Biblical text only matches Nuweiba Beach, in that it had to have been big enough for a large number of people and that it had to be enclosed by mountains and accessable by a river/creek vally or wadi.According to the record text, the Egyptians had the Israelites entrapped so as a Red Sea/Aqaba crossing was the only possible escape route.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

and naturaly you can prove this by diving there and finding a huge pile of egyptian chariots, armor, and skeletons.

Have you read this thread Buz?Let's start with Message 25 and then Message 28 and then Message 36 and then again in Message 40. Those should do as starters. Good grief Buz. If the Romans could do anything at all, they could and did build roads. Everywhere. Ethiopia and Yemen were major sources for some spices and also gold.Aqaba was a major port as well as a central distribution location.For some basic information on Roman Roads east of the Jordan, start here.also...

quote:

---

Aqaba has been an inhabited settlement since 4000 BC profiting from its strategic location at the junction of trading routes between Asia, Africa, and Europe. The early settlement was presumably Edomite in ancient times. It was a center of the Edomites, and then of the Arab Nabataeans, during the first century B.C. who populated the region extensively.

---

from Wiki.You do realize that places Aqaba as a major city at the time of Adam don't you? I've been trying to do that here at EvC for many years, I'll admit it looks like without much luck.The civilizations in the area go back even before the Hebrews were a people. Who did you think the Medians and Edomites andAnd Buz, so far I have seen no evidence that there even is some significant Nuweiba Beach.Maybe that is still in the evidence you plan on presenting.The whole area was under Egyptian control at the time of the supposed Biblical Exodus. Since then, there were many Roman constructions in the area and there is NO reason to suppose that any columns, buildings or artifacts are related to the Biblical Exodus myth.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

quote:

---

Context says they crossed into Midian which was in Arabia, clearly implying what is now known as The Gulf Of Aqaba.

---

The context says nothing of the sort. In fact it seems to place Mount Sinai OUTSIDE of Midian.

quote:

---

The NT also designates Arabia as the location of Mt Sinai. Tradition miss-named the Sinai Pinensula and miss-located Mt Sinai, contrary to the Biblical record and the evidence first discovered/pioneered by Ron Wyatt.

---

In NT times the designation "Arabia" included Sinai, as you know from previous discussion of the point. Wikipedia states: If Ron Wyatt thought that "Arabia" excluded the Sinai peninsula then Ron Wyatt was ignorant and wrong.

quote:

---

Not only that, but the topography described in the Biblical text only matches Nuweiba Beach, in that it had to have been big enough for a large number of people and that it had to be enclosed by mountains and accessable by a river/creek vally or wadi.

---

Where does the Biblical description of the site mention mountains or "a river/creek valley or wadi" ?

Hi Buz, i would like to have an answer to my question Message 26 which talks about evidence that will definitely have lasted thousands of years, but I think you really need to answer fraco at Message 29 where he has done some rather good back of the envelope calculations to estimate, for example, purely the number of goats that would have to be slaughtered.Now I don't know about what you think about such things, but broken pottery, knives, bones, campfires, tools and more will be found even today from such an exodus. It is inevitable.Unlike millions of years old fossils (which we also still find relatively intact), such pieces will not have decayed by anything near as much over a mere 3000 years or so. Even paper, in certain conditions, survives that long.So please, whilst you're talking about "evidence" such as your hokey rock and doctored pictures of "golden calves" that are no such thing, ask yourself the simple question of where all the detritus from the jews went.If they were fleeing, then they would drop lots of stuff and not pick it up - it would all stay there potentially forever. If they were not fleeing, they would stop, make camp and make a mess (which would remain, even if they cleaned up after themselves).Either way, there would literally be mountains of evidence.so where is it?Whilst you talk about "disastrous" results, please realise what you're saying (that's the gist of my question).

Have a look, Jar, at the West Gulf Of Aqaba topography. And you think a coastal highway would or could have gone through that in ancient days?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Paul, two things:1. The Bible does not refer to the Sinai Peninsula as the Sinai Peninsula. I believe it was considered the "Wilderness of Sin" or something like that.2. A map of the land of the Midianites, shows it as the whole wilderness area East of What is now known as the Gulf of Aqaba (then, a wing of the Red Sea. )It is my understanding that what later became known as part of Arabia was, in Moses's day, known as the land of Midian.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Yes. but Sinai is also a part of Arabia, so sources saying that the mountain was located "in Arabia", does not help your cause one bit.

quote:

---

1. The Bible does not refer to the Sinai Peninsula as the Sinai Peninsula. I believe it was considered the "Wilderness of Sin" or something like that.

---

Irrelevant. The point is that in NT times "Arabia" included Sinai and so when the NT places Mount Sinai in "Arabia" it does NOT exclude the traditional location. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply ignorant.

quote:

---

2. A map of the land of the Midianites, shows it as the whole wilderness area East of What is now known as the Gulf of Aqaba (then, a wing of the Red Sea. )

​

It is my understanding that what later became known as part of Arabia was, in Moses's day, known as the land of Midian.

---

So, since Exodus implies that Mount Sinai is not in Midian it looks that Wyatt is wrong.(Note also that your source claims: )I also note that you provide no evidence of any Biblical reference to mountains with a wadi or dry river providing a route through for the crossing site. May I take it that you concede that there is no such reference ?

Are you kidding Buz. Look at the topography of Italy or Greece. Have you ever heard of the Alps? What is in that picture that would present even a new challenge to the Romans?Have you seen Petra? It was important because it was a major trading hub and it is in even more forbidding territory.In fact the modern highway 5 follows much of the old Roman road.AbE: I thought a few maps that shows the extent of the Roman Empire might help understanding that nothing along the Gulf of Aqaba presented a major challenge to the Romans in building roads. The first shows the extent of the Roman Empire over several periods. As you can see, there are no mountains comparable to the Alps, the Apennines, the Caucuses or the Atlas mountains in the Arabian Peninsula. The second shows the developed areas in green between about 300BCE and 700CE.Edited by jar, : add a couple maps.Edited by jar, : can't even spal AbE: currkly

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Just a side-note on Buz's source, The New World Encyclopedia.

quote:

---

Our Approach and Worldview

​

This project transcends the metaphysical assumptions of both the Enlightenment and Modern Encyclopedias.

​

The originator of this project is Sun Myung Moon. NWE editors are guided by scholarly texts expressing the theological and philosophical systematization of his life and teachings, the universal values and ideals inherent in the great religions, philosophies, and teachings of conscience, and the core principles of the Universal Peace Federation.

---

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Jar, I know better than to trust any source that Buz cites. He doesn't do quality control. As in all things he only cares that it says what he wants (when he even cares about that much).

This is the last part of your reference (emphasis mine).When the Israelites reached Sinai, they were in Midian.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008