the da vinci code!! funny thing is, we have Christian writings from the 1st century which say the exact same thing about Jesus the church says today, basically.
Actually, I think that is more an atheist endeavor. Perhaps it isn't engaged in by atheists, but the impulse that drives this kind of research is more atheistic than devout. They want to find some sort of logical explanation on how these things could happen without divine intervention. So, it is weird blend of assuming that the Bible is true in recounting events and yet thinking God doesn't exist or is either not omnipotent or not interventionist. It seems illogical and well short of devout. The Tamarian myth thing sound bogus because of this: This makes an implicit appeal to the audial similarity between the would 'Sinai' and 'I and I.' Do you know how to say 'I and I' in ancient Hebrew? I don't, but I'm certain it doesn't sound like Sinai. Using audual similarities in English discredits the whole story.
The people wanting to find some sort of logical explanation on how these things could happen without divine intervention are missing the point as much as the literalists are. I don't think he was comapring the audial similarity, just the stories. Campbell was too knowledgeable for that.
Another point: Finding out that worldly facts mentioned in the Bible are historically accurate should not be interpreted as support for the religious messages of the Bible. ( Not saying that they aren't true, just that one does not mean the other.) Several mythological based transcripts of history from several different faith systems have recorded events later discovered to be true, the most prominent being Heinrich Schliemann's discovery of Troy, thought for centuries to be a myth, based entirely upon his readings of Homer's Illiad. The fact that Troy was real, and was sacked around 1200 BC no more proves the veracity of the Gods of Oympus than would the Red Sea having parted prove Yaweh is real.
I wouldn't base my opinion about something solely on a 30-60 minute special on The Discovery Channel. While it's true that the Hebrew words Yam Suph may be more accurately translated "Sea of Reeds" than "Red Sea," that alone doesn't tell the whole story. I don't believe the translation "Red Sea" is as inaccurate at some believe. There's some indication that what the Hebrew Scriptures call Yam Suph (i.e., the Sea of Reeds) is the same body of water we call the Red Sea. For example, years after the exodus, we're told that "King Solomon built a fleet of ships at Ezion-geber, which is near Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom" (1 Kings 9:26 English Standard Version). There's no doubt about the location of Ezion-geber. It was located on the tip of what we now call the Gulf of Aqaba, the eastern arm of the Red Sea. The same words (Yam Suph) are used in this passage and translated "Red Sea," just like in the account of the exodus. There's no doubt which body of water is being referred to in 1 Kings. It is the Red Sea. So, although "Red Sea" is not a literal translation of Yam Suph, I still believe it's an accurate one. The words "Red Sea" accurately identify the body of water indicated in the text. Just to add my two cents, I'll tell you what I think at present about the exodus. I'm leaning toward believing that the crossing of the "Red Sea" took place at none of the traditional sites. I believe the Israelites crossed neither the Gulf of Suez nor what some now refer to as the Sea of Reeds. I still have some questions in my mind, but I'm leaning toward their crossing being at the Gulf of Aqaba. I know what you're thinking: "How could that be, since they would come to Mt. Sinai before reaching the Gulf of Aqaba?" I don't necessarily believe Mt. Sinai is located on the Sinai peninsula (which wasn't named that for hundreds of years -- actually, thousands). It's not like the mountain has a big sign on it or something indicating that it's Mt. Sinai. I believe there's good evidence that Sinai is actually in Saudi Arabia and that the children of Israel crossed the Gulf of Aqaba to get to it. Rather than ramble on about it myself, I'll post some links. I'm not sure I'd buy everything on these Web pages, but you might find them interesting. I'm certainly not vouching for these Web sites in general, but they're what I could find on a quick Google search. http://www.versebyverse.org/doctrine/redsea.html http://www.baseinstitute.org/Sinai_2.html
You find this kind of thing frequently in "liberal scholarship." The men who often engage in this kind of endeavor sometimes believe that there is a God, although not always. Either way, they're usually opposed to the accounts of the supernatural in the Bible. One example of this is William Barclay, the author of The Daily Study Bible Series. I ran across an intersting article about him the other day, one that I mostly agree with (link at the bottom of the post). By the way, I couldn't agree more with Macbeth's first post. http://www.christiancourier.com/penpoints/barclayEnigma.htm
Max, thanks for posting this. I love this stuff. There is a magazine that my mother used to suscribe to, and it was called something like 'Christian ARcheaology' or something of the sort. It was all about various discoveries searches and things related to biblical events. MacBeth, I don't know that searching for scientific possibilities behind biblical events is denying faith or anything. I think merely it's part of an ongoing search for both religeous followers and others as well to increase their understanding. The more any of us can understand about what may or may not have happened the better off we are. Though it can be twisted depending on people's own individual needs for finding the discoveries.
A guy I go to church with went to a course held by Christians who come from the Jewish tradition. They still adhere to many of the rituals of Judaism, but profess that Jesus is the Messiah that the Old Testament foretold. Really not surprising considering most of the earliest Christians were Jewish.
My Catholic family celebrates passover (with a christian twist). But this year I'm going to try and convince them to have a strictly Jewish one. "Why, then the world's mine oyster, Which I with sword will open."
