Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile, Volume 1 (of 5): In the years 1768, 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772 and 1773Bruce, James
History
Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile, Volume 1 (of 5): In the years 1768, 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772 and 1773
Bruce, James
Egypt -- Description and travel; Ethiopia -- Description and travel; Ethiopia -- History; Natural history -- Ethiopia; Nile River
It was proposed to Mr Niebuhr, when in Egypt, to inquire, upon the
spot, Whether there were not some ridges of rocks, where the water was
shallow, so that an army at particular times might pass over? Secondly,
Whether the Etesian winds, which blow strongly all Summer from the
north west, could not blow so violently against the sea, as to keep
it back on a heap, so that the Israelites might have passed without
a miracle? And a copy of these queries was left for me, to join my
inquiries likewise.
But I must confess, however learned the gentlemen were who proposed
these doubts, I did not think they merited any attention to solve them.
This passage is told us, by scripture, to be a miraculous one; and, if
so, we have nothing to do with natural causes. If we do not believe
Moses, we need not believe the transaction at all, seeing that it is
from his authority alone we derive it. If we believe in God that he
made the sea, we must believe he could divide it when he sees proper
reason, and of that he must be the only judge. It is no greater miracle
to divide the Red Sea, than to divide the river of Jordan.
If the Etesian wind blowing from the north-west in summer, could
heap up the sea as a wall, on the right, or to the south, of fifty
feet high, still the difficulty would remain, of building the wall
on the left hand, or to the north. Besides, water standing in that
position for a day, must have lost the nature of fluid. Whence came
that cohesion of particles, that hindered that wall to escape at the
sides? This is as great a miracle as that of Moses. If the Etesian
winds had done this once, they must have repeated it many a time before
and since, from the same causes. Yet, [172]Diodorus Siculus says,
the Troglodytes, the indigenous inhabitants of that very spot, had a
tradition from father to son, from their very earliest and remotest
ages, that once this division of the sea did happen there, and that
after leaving its bottom sometimes dry, the sea again came back, and
covered it with great fury. The words of this author are of the most
remarkable kind. We cannot think this heathen is writing in favour of
revelation. He knew not Moses, nor says a word about Pharaoh, and his
host; but records the miracle of the division of the sea, in words
nearly as strong as those of Moses, from the mouths of unbiassed,
undesigning Pagans.
Were all these difficulties surmounted, what could we do with the
pillar of fire? The answer is, We should not believe it. Why then
believe the passage at all? We have no authority for the one, but what
is for the other; it is altogether contrary to the ordinary nature of
things, and if not a miracle, it must be a fable.
The cause of the several names of the Red Sea, is a subject of more
liberal inquiry. I am of opinion, that it certainly derived its name
from Edom, long and early its powerful master, that word signifying
Red in Hebrew. It formerly went by the name of Sea of Edom, or Idumea;
since, by that of the Red Sea.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account