Evidence for God from Science

This short video is nothing short of amazing! It shows considerable evidence for the actual location of Mt. Sinai being in Saudi Arabia, where Israel crossed the parted Red Sea, where Moses ascended the mountain to a cave, where the Israelites camped, where Moses split rock is, the site of the destroyed golden calf, the oasis in the desert, etc. - it all fits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjrxHqNy5CQ

Tell me what you think!

BTW, just to add some interest to the above conjecture about Mt. Sinai's location, while Dr. Mike Heiser once supported that theory, he has not abandoned it - and explains why, here: http://drmsh.com/location-mount-sinai-y ... t-episode/

AND, here is a fascinating rebuttal by apologist Joel Richardson to Heiser's subsequent view of the issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZHFT4_8qSc - I tend to agree with it, as Heiser's view seems exceptionally selective. I mean, what are the odds of such a remarkable set of evidences all appearing to powerfully fit the modern Saudi Arabian site!

(Note that Heiser and Richardson are friendly and respectful of each other.)

Course, Heiser responds here (http://drmsh.com/location-mount-sinai-y ... t-episode/) to Richardson above. Heiser's key rebuttal point is that he contends that referenced locations along the pathway from the Red Sea are incongruent with and far from the supposed Saudi location for Mount Sinai.

You just ruined it for me by mentioning Heiser.

K, BTW, I think Heiser is wrong. Hope you watched the first video showing the Saudi site evidences!

Thing about Heiser, he's all about the text and context, but I think he misses other things he should give more weight. That Saudi site - I mean, how can one place have so many physical features, logical river crossing, cultic sites, the split rock with a water path, all of these things can simply be one big collective coincidence! Sometimes a technical argument can seem correct - but just like substantial circumstantial evidences provided in a trial that ultimately have other explanations. Anyway, Richardson does a great job of rebutting Heiser's contentions about the location of Mt. Sinai, and his video interjects video outtakes of Heiser's contentions. I really enjoy Joel's videos!

It is so difficult for well-know, public commentators and writers, who have put "all of their eggs in whatever basket," to later reassess and acknowledge they now believe they were probably wrong. Because of pride and due to their perception that they'll no longer be taken as seriously, if they "waffle" on a key contention they've made. I often have this sense about Reasons to Believe and Hugh Ross, as they have so long interpreted certain Bible verses to support their Creationists beliefs - when some passages have nothing to do with their greater assertions. Credibility means acknowledging wherever and whenever one realizes they have been wrong. The more public a person, the rarer that is!

Yeah, I was just jesting, trying to tease, with the Heiser comment.

I watched the video, and really, credence-wise, I don't know. It doesn't look too professional, looks more like a piece done by someone trying to convince others and so stitched that way. Who knows if the locations shown at face value are even real. Besides going and looking in person myself, I'd be more interested in scholarly research and pros and cons. I've never much before considered the spot Moses and the Hebrews arrived at.

I suppose I'm open, but comfortable with not knowing until I some day maybe really delve into it.

Well, it's clear Richardson has very carefully examined both the location and the scholarship.

The only reason I think it is of interest to most Christians might be as an apologetic for the historicity of the Exodus. I don't know for certain either - but it makes sense, the crossing sight is very logical, the altar, stone, mountain, etc. - pretty strange bunch of coincidences.

So I watched the rest of the original video, having a bit more context. Some comments were interesting, from apparently local Saudi people, Muslims, and like. Some things seem too well preserved that are out in the open, proper dating would greatly assist.

Your Richardson video is good. As a side, he mentions some things I believe are eye-opening to Heisler's personality, which is something I personally detected just reading Heisler's writings on other topics (and have found a little off-putting).

In any case, I've taken a bit more time to go through the discussion in the sources you presented re: location of Mt Sinai and it's been quite interesting. Thanks for sharing Phil.

Yes, K - I really agree with you on Heiser. He's brilliant, is willing to challenge conventional / traditional thinking, but sometimes he's too eager to weave things into a perfect alignment - which is a natural impulse, but it sometimes seems forced with him - and way too confident-sounding / slightly arrogant. Still, he's an important theologian and linguist that makes one think.

I have no idea why, but unless I'm being really conscious to it, I tend to refer to Heiser as "Heisler".

Kurieuo wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:39 pm I have no idea why, but unless I'm being really conscious to it, I tend to refer to Heiser as "Heisler".

Curio,

I know what you mean!

RickD wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:43 pm

Kurieuo wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:39 pm I have no idea why, but unless I'm being really conscious to it, I tend to refer to Heiser as "Heisler".

Curio,

I know what you mean!

It's alright Rick, try using a Greek lexicon and see the truth to my name.

This topic reminds me of Ron Wyatt who discovered all of the above plus the Ark of the Covenant.

Yes, it reminded me of that too. But then, there's more than Wyatt undertones.