Red sea or Reed swamp?

[Valke2]

yep.

 

[rayne100]

yep.

Glad you agree

 

[Valke2]

Unless you are Nelson B. DeMille, you should go with the Sea of Reeds translation.

Red Sea would have taken them out of their way, in that they would have had to have travelled much further south, than if they crossed at the sea of reeds.

Highly unlikely one can cross the Red Sea in one day.

The Torah never refers to the Red Sea. The Hebrew yam suph is used. “yam” usually means “sea”, or any large body of water. “Suph” means reeds or rushes. It is the same word used to describe where Moses’ baby basket was placed in the Nile, earlier in the story.

So if you are looking for a literal explanation, you have to go with Sea of Reeds.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

It shouldn’t surprise me though. He states that Liturgical vestments worn by the preist come from Roman culture, not Jewish. .

Am I off base here?

Scott

I dunno about “reed” vs. “Redl,” but our liturgical vestments DID come from Roman, not Jewish culture.

From the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

Origin
The liturgical vestments have by no means remained the same from the founding of the Church until the present day. There is as great a difference between the vestments worn at the Holy Sacrifice in the pre-Constantinian period, and even in the following centuries, and those now customary at the services of the Church, as between the rite of the early Church and that of modern times. Just as the ceremonies that today surround the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries are the product of a long development, so are also the present liturgical vestments. It was sought at an earlier era to derive the Christian priestly dress from the vestments of the Jewish religion. Yet even a superficial comparison of the liturgical vestments of the New Covenant with those of the Old should have sufficed to show the error of such an opinion. The Christian vestments did not originate in the priestly dress of the Old Testament, they have, rather, developed from the secular dress of the Graeco-Roman world. The influence of the dress of the Mosaic cult upon the form of the Christian priestly dress can only conceded in this sense that the recollection of it must have made the use of liturgical garments specially reserved for the services of the Church appear not only entirely in keeping with the dignity of the mysteries of religion, but even necessary. This influence, however, was clearly general in character, not such as to make the Jewish priestly dress the prototype of the Christian.

Here’s the link:

newadvent.org/cathen/15388a.htm

 

[Huiou_Theou]

The red sea / sea of reeds is debatable.
The reason is that not all manuscripts support ‘reed’ sea over their entirety – but some do support red sea over their entirety.

If memory serves right, I believe there is a place in all scriptures
where after the crossing is over, perhaps when they are beginning the journey into the desert – that all manuscripts refer to them being near the RED sea. Perhaps someone who has a little time could research that part out.

 

[Valke2]

I dunno about “reed” vs. “Redl,” but our liturgical vestments DID come from Roman, not Jewish culture.

From the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

Origin
The liturgical vestments have by no means remained the same from the founding of the Church until the present day. There is as great a difference between the vestments worn at the Holy Sacrifice in the pre-Constantinian period, and even in the following centuries, and those now customary at the services of the Church, as between the rite of the early Church and that of modern times. Just as the ceremonies that today surround the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries are the product of a long development, so are also the present liturgical vestments. It was sought at an earlier era to derive the Christian priestly dress from the vestments of the Jewish religion. Yet even a superficial comparison of the liturgical vestments of the New Covenant with those of the Old should have sufficed to show the error of such an opinion. The Christian vestments did not originate in the priestly dress of the Old Testament, they have, rather, developed from the secular dress of the Graeco-Roman world. The influence of the dress of the Mosaic cult upon the form of the Christian priestly dress can only conceded in this sense that the recollection of it must have made the use of liturgical garments specially reserved for the services of the Church appear not only entirely in keeping with the dignity of the mysteries of religion, but even necessary. This influence, however, was clearly general in character, not such as to make the Jewish priestly dress the prototype of the Christian.

Here’s the link:

newadvent.org/cathen/15388a.htm

The priestly garments are well described in Torah for anyone who wants to compare .

 

[Valke2]

The red sea / sea of reeds is debatable.
The reason is that not all manuscripts support ‘reed’ sea over their entirety – but some do support red sea over their entirety.

If memory serves right, I believe there is a place in all scriptures
where after the crossing is over, perhaps when they are beginning the journey into the desert – that all manuscripts refer to them being near the RED sea. Perhaps someone who has a little time could research that part out.

Your memory does not serve right, in this instance. Yes the Red Sea may be mentioned after they crossed. But this occurred sometime after the crossing, after may days of traveling (I think the reference you are thinking of occurs in Numbers, Chapter 33). It would be very odd if they crossed the Red sea and then sometime later, camped by the Red Sea.

 

[Valke2]

The red sea / sea of reeds is debatable.
The reason is that not all manuscripts support ‘reed’ sea over their entirety – but some do support red sea over their entirety.

If memory serves right, I believe there is a place in all scriptures
where after the crossing is over, perhaps when they are beginning the journey into the desert – that all manuscripts refer to them being near the RED sea. Perhaps someone who has a little time could research that part out.

Something in scripture that is debateable? I’m shocked.

 

[super64]

JKirkLVNV Quote:
Originally Posted by super64

It shouldn’t surprise me though. He states that Liturgical vestments worn by the preist come from Roman culture, not Jewish. .

Am I off base here?

Scott

I dunno about “reed” vs. “Redl,” but our liturgical vestments DID come from Roman, not Jewish culture.

From the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

Origin
The liturgical vestments have by no means remained the same from the founding of the Church until the present day. There is as great a difference between the vestments worn at the Holy Sacrifice in the pre-Constantinian period, and even in the following centuries, and those now customary at the services of the Church, as between the rite of the early Church and that of modern times. Just as the ceremonies that today surround the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries are the product of a long development, so are also the present liturgical vestments. It was sought at an earlier era to derive the Christian priestly dress from the vestments of the Jewish religion. Yet even a superficial comparison of the liturgical vestments of the New Covenant with those of the Old should have sufficed to show the error of such an opinion. The Christian vestments did not originate in the priestly dress of the Old Testament, they have, rather, developed from the secular dress of the Graeco-Roman world. The influence of the dress of the Mosaic cult upon the form of the Christian priestly dress can only conceded in this sense that the recollection of it must have made the use of liturgical garments specially reserved for the services of the Church appear not only entirely in keeping with the dignity of the mysteries of religion, but even necessary. This influence, however, was clearly general in character, not such as to make the Jewish priestly dress the prototype of the Christian.

Here’s the link:

newadvent.org/cathen/15388a.htm

JKirkLVNV,

Thank you for responding, I always enjoy your answers.
I’m not sure I understand though. Isn’t there enough similarity between what the Jewish priests wore in Exodus and what Jesus is seen wearing Revelations to say that culture did in fact influence the dress we see today?

Quote:
Exo 28:2 And thou shalt make a holy vesture for Aaron, thy brother, for glory and for beauty.
Exo 28:3 And thou shalt speak to all the wise of heart, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron’s vestments, in which he being consecrated, may minister to me.
Exo 28:4 And these shall be the vestments that they shall make: A rational and an ephod, **a tunic **and a strait linen garment, **a mitre **and a girdle. They shall make the holy vestments for thy brother Aaron and his sons, that they may do the office of priesthood unto me.
Exo 28:5 And they shall take gold, and violet, and purple, and scarlet twice dyed, and fine linen.
Exo 28:6 And they shall make the ephod of gold, and violet, and purple, and scarlet twice dyed, and fine twisted linen, embroidered with divers colours

Rev 1:13 and among them there was what looked like a human being, wearing a robe that reached to his feet, and a gold band around his chest.

Peace,
Scott

P.S. What do you think of Mr. Sean Hannity?

 

[NotWorthy]

In deference to Valke2,

Yahweh leads them through the desert of the Red Sea /Sea of Reeds. The translation “Red Sea” was introduced into Scripture in the 3rd century BC Greek translation of Old Testament known as the Septuagint [in Greek Yam SuphErythra Thalassa, *Red Sea]. This mistake, if it is a mistake and not an interpretation from oral tradition, was picked up by the Latin Vulgate and became imbedded in most English translations. In Hebrew the word is *Yam Suph *[also written as “*suf”

], literally “sea reed”, or Sea of Reeds.

Bible scholars have not been able to determine the exact location of the Sea of Reeds. Some scholars have suggested either Lake Timash, a large lake halfway between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea, or the Bitter Lakes, a series of lakes just to the south of Timsha, or the Red Sea itself, specifically the Gulf of Suez. Both Timsha and the Bitter Lakes are bodies of water the people would have come across had they taken the central route across the Sinai. But there are problems with this route: became

1. The middle of the Sinai is by far the most difficult route.

2. The mountains in the center of the peninsula are barely mountains…mostly large hills and Horeb/Sinai is described as a mountain.

3. The Biblical text says it took a little over a month to reach Sinai from the Yam Suph but the distance from the Bitter Lakes to the mountains/hills in central Sinai is only a few hundred miles.

 

[NotWorthy]

And then for further information:

It does seem more likely that the Children of Israel took the southern route across the Sinai. The Southern route offers a series of oases along the Gulf of Suez where the Israelites could have stopped on the journeyed eastward across the peninsula. The southern route also provides majestic mountains befitting the description of Mt. Sinai. There is more water in the south, which would make it easier to support a large population, but of course God did provide them with water in His own way. It is also colder in the southern desert and more difficult to survive, but Yahweh provided for the people in that hardship as well.

Since St. Helena’s visit to the Sinai in the 4th century in her attempt to locate the holy sites, pilgrims have been coming to the southern mountains of the Sinai believing they are visiting the holy Mountain of God.

P.S. This information comes from Agape Bible Study.Com