Which of these is correct? the Hebrew wording is: "Yam Suph"?
2007-01-19 09:50:47 · 9 answers · asked by The Tourist 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
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.).
KJV got it wrong.
2007-01-19 09:58:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sea of Reeds
2007-01-19 17:55:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Both. In Biblical times it was known as the Sea of Reeds. Today, it is the Red Sea.
2007-01-19 17:59:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sea of Reeds. The Oxford Annotated Bible has a nice discussion of this.
2007-01-19 17:53:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Seems to me, if it were the "Sea of Reeds", someone would know where that body of water was located...all I can find is where different scholars think it might have been.
Just a thought.....
2007-01-19 18:28:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sea of reeds.
2007-01-19 17:53:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, the Red Sea was *not* parted .... it was a sea of reeds.
2007-01-19 17:57:23 · answer #7 · answered by MyPreshus 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
a "sea of reeds" that was somehow deep enough to drown an army of seasoned soldiers and their war horses....wow!
2007-01-19 18:09:11 · answer #8 · answered by glen50beach 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Either way it was parted, the foundation was dry, and deep enough for the Pharaoh's army to drown in it.
2007-01-19 18:06:10 · answer #9 · answered by ἡ ἐκλογὴ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋