>
>(1) "The normal highway running parallel
>with the coast and going
>by way of Sileh (the
>modern el-Kantara); there are wells
>and military posts at intervals
>along its course. The
>fugitive group certainly did not
>take it. The group
>driven out of Egypt may
>have done so.

Let's get back to what historical records state, if there was a fugitive group, it did not leave before the group that was allowed out...as well, the land that was endrenched in military was not solely military of egypt, it was also the military of the people of philistine....these we know are from teh seed of Ishmael...these people were fighting amongst each other and with teh egyptians....as well their land is much further north than right next door to egypt...so egypt's military was not heavy(deep) in Philistia...


>(2) "The words 'the Sea of
>Reeds', in Hebrew yam suph,
>are additional.

this is blaspheme taht is not what it says in hebrew...simply that

The original
>text gave only a general
>indication: the Isralites took the
>desert route, to the east
>or south-east.

this is true and if you look on a map today what is south-southeast of egypt what sea is...there is your prook, if teh israelite did not go north, they could not have gone west....which leaves two more indications...now teh bible states that they went through a desert in the wilderness, we know this to be the arabian desert....

therefore if you look on a map any map...the only route is to go over the red sea...that is the only way to get to the arabian desert...from egypt...

it's simple, read what your scholars say and then look at a map, then draw your own conclusions, it's not hard, it's common sense, but these scholars(reasonwhy I don't like these new age schoars) assume that people don't have common sense to look and find out for ourselves that what they are saying is wrong...


The meaning
>and location of what is
>termed 'the Sea of Suph'
>are uncertain: it is not
>mentioned in the ch. 4
>narrative, which only speaks of
>'the sea'. The sole
>ancient text to mention the
>'Sea of Suph' or 'Sea
>of Reeds' (translating the Egyptian
>term--see also the phrase in
>Numbers 21:4) is 15:4, which
>is poetic.


and thsi is even more proof of that....can you find the sea of reeds on a map...teh sea of reeds is actually a mote, a wading lake liek one found at the shore of a river, it was like a swamp....as well....

Historians and diggers with diving teams have recovered from teh red sea ampng other things, helmets and horses bones, chariot wheel holders(the metal that hold the spokes and makes the wheel) at the bottom of the red sea so this is a misinterpretation...

I would invest in an hebrew englis tanach, a copy of the hebrew alphabet and start teaching myself how to read hebrew to see for myself, it's not hard, I did it...