When we read the Bible, there are certain things we take for granted to be so well documented and so well understood, we believe there’s absolutely no way we could be in error of such a historic event as the exodus out of Egypt.  Yet, if we actually read the Bible, without bias or any preconceived belief system, and allow the words themselves to reveal the truth, you will be shocked.  I suspect, once you understand exactly what is written in the books of Exodus and Numbers, you may begin to wonder whether anything we thought we understood about our modern Bibles is accurate.  And I wouldn’t blame you.

When the Exodus begins, Moses leads the Israelites from Pharaoh’s city of Rameses and heads almost due south (or, SSE) towards the first identified town, called Succoth (Ex. 12:37).  If you have a KJV Bible that contains maps after the book of Revelation, the location of Succoth can be seen on Map 2.  You’ll notice, at this point, the people are still about 50 miles north of the uppermost shoreline of the Red Sea, called the Gulf of Suez.  Based on conventional wisdom in order for the throng of people to eventually cross the Red Sea, they would have to continue their journey further south in order to reach the Red Sea.  But, do they?

Exo. 13:18–“But Yahweh led the people about, through the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea: and the children of Israel went up harnessed out of the land of Egypt.”  The “wilderness of the Red Sea”?  Thus far, they had not arrived AT the Red Sea, but they were in an area that was close enough to it that it’s called the “wilderness” of it.  In fact, the actual Hebrew words in this context are ים של גראס, translated “sea of weed”, not the “Red Sea”.  Why would Moses have called this body of water the “sea of weed” when the Red Sea was such an easily-identifiable body of water?  Perhaps he’ll get more specific as this story of the Exodus continues.

What else does this verse say?  It says they “went up”, but went up from what?  From Succoth, of course, because that was where they had arrived before Yahweh directed Moses to take them in a different direction.  Did he take them further south toward the Red Sea?  Nope.

In Hebrew, the word “went up” is a single word עלה ל-, pronounced “alou”, which means “they ascended”.  What does “ascended” mean?  It means they rose up; they changed directions and instead of continuing their journey south, closer to the Red Sea, they went north, or “up”.  Ancient maps, like our modern maps, always depicted North toward the top, so we can clearly see that Moses, after traveling SSE to Succoth, now turned almost completely around and headed due north.  How can we be sure that this was the direction that he took the people?  Easy, the Bible identifies that destination.

Exo. 13:20 and Num. 33:6 essentially describe the same directional change–“And they took their journey from Succoth, and encamped in Etham, in the edge of the wilderness.“  So, we obviously know that Etham must be north of Succoth, since that’s where they changed direction and went “up”, but where is Etham?  It says it’s “in the edge of the wilderness”.  What could Moses possibly mean by this non-specific location?  If the “edge of the wilderness” was a location that had vast desert in front of it, how could this be described as the “edge”?  Also, if their new location was described as a wilderness, this clearly rules out any proximity to a body of water which includes the Red Sea or ANY other water source.  We don’t have to ponder the question very long because after this short journey north ended, Moses kindly identifies the nearby towns that Yahweh instructed him to take them to so we may pinpoint their new location.

Exo. 14:1–“And Yahweh spake unto Moses, saying,  ² Speak unto the children of Israel, that they turn and encamp before Pihahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over against Baalzephon: before it shall ye encamp by the sea.  ³ For Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel, They are entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in.”  Is THIS the “Red Sea” that Moses is referring to?  If so, how did they magically get there, since they had just finished traveling due north from Succoth?  Can any of these three cities be identified?  Check out Map 2 once again.  You can clearly see that Baalzephon is INDEED located almost EXACTLY due north of Succuth, just as Moses said.  The entire throng of people had now arrived at a location with no place to escape.  This is what is meant by being “entangled in the land”.  Immediately to the west of Baalzephon was Pharaoh’s army pursuing them (Exo. 14:4-9), so that escape route was blocked.  Immediately to their east, was a body of water, so that direction was also out of the question too.  Due north was the Mediterranean Sea, so that’s a no-brainer.  And, since they had just arrived near Baalzephon from Succoth in the south, it would make absolutely no sense to simply turn around then travel right back to their former location.  After all, Moses was just following Yahweh’s order to take them north.

This directional change is repeated in Exo. 14:2, above, and the Hebrew text makes the northerly direction even more evident.  In v. 2, the words translated “that they turn” at the beginning of the verse are the Hebrew words דבר אל בני “u-ishbu”, which literally means “and they-shall-return”.  Return?  Return to what?  Keep in mind, the Israelites had not yet traveled a very great distance since they left Rameses.  They began their journey by traveling SSE, then reversed direction and went “up” against Baalzephon and encamped by the sea.  In other words, they “returned” and headed north, in the general direction from which they started their journey to freedom.  And, since Baalzephon is located almost due east of Rameses, we can easily pinpoint the Israelites in the vicinity of the delta region of the Nile River, not the Red Sea, which is now 80-90 miles further south.  Did they ever leave this upper region of the Nile delta?  Are there additional cities that we can find which will help establish their location?  Yes, Migdol (above) is also mentioned and this city’s location can be seen on Map 5 of the KJV Bible.  A careful examination will show that THIS city is slightly beyond the body of water that separates it from Baalzephon to its west.  And, since they were BETWEEN Migdol and the sea, this clearly shows their correct location.

To summarize: The Israelites were near Baalzephon.  That city was west of a body of water that the Israelites had encamped adjacent to.  And, between them and the town of Migdol was a sea.  The moment of truth is about to arrive because Pharaoh is getting closer.

Exo. 14:10–“And when Pharaoh drew nigh, the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and, behold, the Egyptians marched after them; and they were sore afraid: and the children of Israel cried out unto the Yahweh.” 

They had good reason to be afraid.  This was no mundane, bounty-hunter posse that was in hot pursuit.  No, Pharaoh was coming after Moses and the recently-freed slaves with everything he had.

Exo. 14:7–“And he took six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt, and captains over every one of them.“  They were staring down the barrel of 600 of Pharaoh’s BEST chariots, PLUS every single other chariot in all of Egypt!  But, even this does not give the reader the full impact of this moment.  In English, we lose the full meaning of the words “over every one of them“.  In Hebrew, this expression is rendered “u-shlshm ol kl-u”, literally meaning “and third-fighters on all-of him”.  In other words, not only did Pharaoh pursue them with every single chariot in all of Egypt, he also was chasing them with 1/3 of the entire Egyptian army!  No wonder they were frightened out of their minds!

Moses was about to reveal the power of Yahweh to the entire nation of Israel and he safely brings them across the Red Sea, right?  If you’re confused at this point, I don’t blame you.  How can they cross the Red Sea when they’re still 80-90 miles away?  The answer?  They don’t.  How can it be possible that the site that the nation of Israel is about to cross is constantly referred to as the “Red Sea” when they’re nowhere near it?  Yahweh gives specific instructions to Moses of what to do next.

Exo. 14.16–“But lift thou up thy rod, and stretch out thine hand over the sea, and divide it: and the children of Israel shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea.“  We now can be certain that the “sea” Yahweh is referring to is this relatively shallow body of water that flowed from south to north, forming one of the many tributaries of the northernmost region of the Nile delta and many, many miles north of the Gulf of Suez, which is the nearest part of the actual Red Sea.

Exo. 14:21–“And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Yahweh caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.”  Several facts must be recognized here.  One) The wind blew all night and it came from the east, therefore, it was blowing toward the west.  Two) The waters were divided.  Were they “divided” into huge walls that were 100’s of feet tall–as they would have to be if this were the actual RED SEA–or were they divided in some other fashion?

The Hebrew words for “made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided” are עשה את הים יבש יבש והמים היו מחולקים, pronounced: “u-ishm ath-e im lchrbe u-ubqou e-mim”.  This expression, exactly transliterated into English as “and he-is-placing the sea to [the] drained-area and they-are-being-split the waters.”  This body of water, in the upper Nile delta region, which would have obviously been much shallower than the Red Sea, had a strong easterly wind blow all night, causing the waters that flowed northward to be SPLIT and they DRAINED toward the left and the right, or in this case, toward the north and the south.  So, if this shallow body of water “drained”, which caused the ground to now be dry, why did Moses say, in the very next verse, that they formed a “wall”?

Exo. 14:22–“And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.“

It is because only moments earlier, all of Israel was in a panic.  They thought they were about to be killed by Pharaoh’s army.  They could not go west–that’s where Pharaoh was.  They couldn’t go north, as that’s where the Mediterranean Sea was.  They had already been south (in Succoth) and now they were trapped with water directly to their east.  So, when Yahweh performed this miracle, causing the waters to flow to their left and right to prevent Pharaoh from attacking them from either of THOSE directions, it didn’t matter whether the waters that flowed there were ten feet deep or 300 feet deep.  The fact that the waters had been placed there, or “flowed” there, it was, in fact, a WALL that stopped him dead in his tracks.  That’s why Moses said that it was a wall “UNTO THEM”, because it was as great a barrier as there could be which kept them safe from Pharaoh’s wrath.

The following morning, when Pharaoh’s army began to chase after them again, the English Bible poorly describes the beginning of that chase.  In Exo. 14:25, we read “And took off their chariot wheels, that they drave them heavily: so that the Egyptians said, Let us flee from the face of Israel; for Yahweh fighteth for them against the Egyptians.”  This is confusing, as the reader is left wondering “Why did they take off their chariot wheels?  That makes no sense at all.”  It’s because they didn’t.

Hebrew: והורידו את גלגלי המרכבה שלהם, שהם מטפטפים אותם בכבדות “and he is-clogging wheel-of chariots-of him and he-is-making-drive him in heaviness….”  NOW, the actual meaning makes sense!  They didn’t “remove” the wheels!  The wheels were getting clogged with all the muck that was returning and the dry land was becoming soft and gooey again.

But wait–haven’t we all learned from Charlton Heston that when the waters returned, they came CRASHING DOWN onto the Egyptian army?  Isn’t that what happened next?  No again.

Exo. 15:4 reinforces the truth of this event when Moses wrote “his chosen captains also are drowned in the sea.”  However, a deeper dive (I couldn’t help myself) into the Hebrew text reveals “and choice-of third-fighters-of him they-SANK in sea-of weed.”  If millions of gallons of water suddenly fell upon them, this moment would not mention that they “sank”.  This would only be possible if the heavy, mucky wheels and the heavy armor was CAUSING them to SINK down into the mud and they were completely trapped before the majority of the waters had finished flowing back to their former location.  There is even more to be understood about this verse, which I’ll point out in a moment.

Exo. 14:27, in Hebrew-English transliteration: “and he-is-stretching-out Moses hand-of him over the sea and he-is-returning the sea to to-face-of morning to PERENNIAL-FLOW-OF HIM and Egyptians ones-fleeing to-meet-of him….”

Notice–Moses says that as the waters returned, they were a perennial flow, which is something that happens gradually, not instantly.  No “walls’ of water came crashing down ONTO the Egyptian army; rather, they were stuck with all that heavy muck on their chariot wheels and they slowly watched as the waters returned to their former place.  He also said that the waters returned to the “face of morning”, which obviously means they returned by flowing back to the east, where the sun comes up in the morning.  Why is this significant?  What direction did the winds come from that blew all night?  From the east.  It was this wind that pushed the waters, but now that the winds had stopped, gravity was taking over and the waters were just doing water water does and flowed back to their former place.

A literal wall of water would have crashed down upon the army, killing them instantly.  But since we now know that it “flowed” back to its former place, we know that the entire army would have seen the waters rising around them, but they were helpless to do anything about it.  With the heavy chariots and their heavy armor, they were all doomed.

As soon as Moses successfully brought Israel across this body of water, we finally–for the FIRST time–have him tell us that they came across the Red Sea so he wrote a song–or psalm–as chapter 15.  All of chapter 15 is Moses’s song of gratitude to Yahweh for saving him and his chosen people, and in the lyrics to this song, he provides some amazing revelations.

Now, back to Exo. 15:4–“Pharaoh’s chariots and his host hath he cast into the sea: his chosen captains also are drowned in the Red sea.“  Yes!  See?  It says it right there!  They drowned in the RED SEA!

Or not.

As I mentioned, THIS is exactly what Moses wrote: “chariots-of Pharaoh and army-of  him he-shot in the sea and choice-of third-fighters-of him they sank in the SEA OF WEED.”  What?  Sea of Weed?  Is that just another name for the Red Sea?  Or, is it an easily-identifiable body of water and is NOT the Red Sea?  The Hebrew word here is הים האדום “im-suph”, meaning “sea of weed”, so why is it rendered Red Sea in our Bibles?

Later, in Exo. 15:8, he said “And with the blast of thy nostrils the waters were gathered together, the floods stood upright as an heap, and the depths were congealed in the heart of the sea.“  Lest the reader get the impression that THIS is the key verse that describes the gigantic mountain of water that MUST have come crashing down onto Pharaoh’s army, here’s how it reads in Hebrew: “…ones-flowing they-are-curdled abysses in-heart-of sea.”  If some massive wall of water suddenly came crashing down upon the army, why would Moses have used the word “curdled”?

This word, also rendered “congealed” in other translations is another excellent description of the muck that had built up on the chariot’s tires.  If something was “congealed” or “curdled”, we can very easily understand that THAT build-up of heavy muck prevented the army from going forward or retreating backward.  If tons of water had suddenly landed on top of the army–who only moments earlier were traveling on solid ground–there would not have have been time for anything to have “curdled” or “congealed”.  Everything, everywhere, instantly would have gone from dry ground to deep underwater.  At that point, how could anything have “curdled”?  If land suddenly goes from totally dry to totally wet, how in the world would it have any time to “congeal”?  And what difference would it have made?  Moses reveals, in the lyrics to this song, the exact cause of  death of Pharaoh’s army and all of the chariots of Egypt.

The Sea of Weed, was a low-lying body of water, that made up the many tributaries and at least seven known lakes of the northern Nile River delta region.  In the days of Pharaoh, this region was known as a place where they could grow papyrus in abundance, as that was the necessary material that the people used for writing.  Papyrus scrolls were the closest thing to books that existed at the time.  The “weeds” were an obvious metaphor for “papyrus”.  But, certainly I can’t base my entire post upon this one eenie-meenie verse that translated “Red Sea” as “sea of weed”, right?  Right. Let’s look at 100% of the entire Bible and see how it translated other times.

The words “Red Sea” only appear in scripture a total of 28 times, so it does not take too long to look up every verse in its original language.

Exo. 10:19, we find the words “Red Sea”, but in the original text, it’s rendered “sea-ward weed”, so the first appearance of these words are already incorrect.

Num. 21:14, Red Sea is in the Bible, but not only is there no reference to the “Red Sea” in the Hebrew text, there’s no name of ANY body of water, only a generic word for water.  “on-so he-is-being-said in scroll [papyrus] of wars-of Yahweh Waheb in Suphah and the-watercourses Arnon”.  For some reason, the translators felt it necessary to conclude that this verse was describing the Red Sea, so they included those words in our modern texts, but this is in addition to what was written, so it’s incorrect to do so.

Deut. 1:1, the words “Red Sea” appear, and once again, there is nothing remotely close to those words in the Hebrew text.  “these the words which he-spoke Moses to all-of Israel in-across-of the-Jordan in [the] wilderness in [the] gorge opposite Suph between Paran and-between Tophel and-Laban and Hazeroth and-Di-Zahab.”

Honestly?  The translators felt it necessary to take these words and insert “Red Sea” in this verse?

Clearly, each of these three verses, which contain the words Red Sea, do so in error.  What about the other 25 verses in the Bible?

Exo. 13:18, 15:4, 15:22, 23:31, Num. 14:25, 21:4, 33:10, 33:11, Deut. 1:40, 2:1, 11:4, Josh. 2:10, 4:23, 24:6, Jdg. 11:16, 1 King 9:26, Neh. 9:9, Ps. 106:7, 106:9, 106:22, 136:13, 136:15, Jer. 49:21 ALL express the Hebrew words “im-suph”, which means “sea of weed”, not the Red Sea.

This comprises all of the times the words “Red Sea” appear in the Old Testament.  These words are only found twice in the New Testament, in Acts 7:36 and Heb. 11:29.  The Greek words Ερυθρά Θάλασσα or “eruthra thatlasse” do translate into the words “Red Sea”, but we need to keep in mind that the Greek text was the second language of the New Testament, not its original language.  To fully understand the intent and meaning of the author of any books of the Bible, I would trust reading his (or her) words in the same language that they wrote it as the most accurate translation of those words.

So, there you have it.  Moses lead the Israelites across the eastern part of Egypt, crossed a shallow body of water that had become dry from a wind that blew from the east all night, allowing them to pass over on dry land.  The following day, the waters returned and gradually engulfed the army, killing them all.  This passage, which was in the upper Nile delta region, is the northernmost land in the wilderness of the Sea of Weed, NOT the Red Sea because the actual Red Sea is nowhere near the actual spot that they crossed.  In fact, the crossing occurred at a place that today is one of the busiest waterways on the planet, allowing freight to travel from east to west, and vice versa, without having to travel around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa.  It is the Suez Canal.

And the most remarkable point of all?  The body of water that we know as the Red Sea had absolutely nothing to do with the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt.  In fact, the actual Red Sea is completely irrelevant to this story and has no Biblical significance whatsoever.  It is not even a geographical landmark to identify the wilderness area that truly WAS the place that they crossed.  The truth is, the body of water called the Red Sea is never mentioned even once in the entirety of scripture.  Never.  Every single reference to the “Red Sea” is, in fact, the “sea of weed”.  The only significance that the Red Sea can claim is that it was a body of salt water that was approximately 90 miles south of where Moses lead the Israelites across a much shallower body of water.

Sorry, Cecil B. DeMille.  You gave the Red Sea way too much screen time.