Jebel al-Lawz Cannot Be the Real Mount Sinai

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Great video!

[@pablomarques3684]

👈🏽😮

[@zach2382]

Hi IP

[@EvanHuber-nv3kl]

Much like Ken Ham, Ron Wyatt is one of the people I now kick myself for believing when I first converted to Christianity.

[@DarkBlade37]

Fun fact: One proposed site for Mt Sinai (that I first heard on this channel) has an Arabic name that literally translates to “Mountain of Moses”

[@justiniand6a788]

Wouldn't that be the traditional and historically-held site of Mt. Sinai?

[@richardpetervonrahden6393]

Thank you for the detailed breakdown of the Jebel al Lawz proposition. This is very useful information. I know you have already made a video on the more likely Exodus route based on the towns listed; maybe link that in the description of this video? Better yet, a comparative video showing the actual route versus the Ron Wyatt route, with maps of each, would really nail this topic down well. Suggestions for further videos: (1) while the real Mount Sinai is probably in the Sinai peninsula I understand the evidence for the St Catherine's site isn't particularly strong...? So perhaps a video on the Real Real Mt Sinai site would be nice. (2) the Wyattists have placed a lot of stock on the inscriptions / petroglyphs on that rock - especially the depictions of bulls and calves. It is interesting to hear that these inscriptions may be 2nd century BCE Nabatean works. I would find it interesting to have more detail on why this is felt to be the case. And although not related to the Exodus, some more background on these Nabateans would be interesting. Thank you again.

[@501Mobius]

True. Hoffmeier said that no pottery remains of the time period has been found at either mountain. Though Dr. Erez Ben-Yosef found that Bedouins that move their flocks about do no use pottery for about half a year. I can think of three reasons St. Catherines isn't Mt. Sinai and Ain Qadis in the Negev is not Kadesh Barnea. 1. It is too far from Horeb. (DT 1:2). It is more than 11 days journey. 2. It cannot be reached using the Mt. Seir Road (DT 1:2) We know that Edom is in the Mt. Seir region. 3. No toponym for the second camp after leaving Horeb is at the sea where quail can come into camp. (Num 11:31)

[@punitjayadev8043]

​@@501Mobius so lawz?

[@501Mobius]

@@punitjayadev8043 Seems to be higher probability. But, you don't get there by crossing at Nuweiba beach. You just stay on the road past Ezion Geber and hang a right. There is a paper at Academia on the Hejaz in Midian being a part of the 13th-11th century mining community at Timna. Remember Jethro and Hobab were Kenites.

[@punitjayadev8043]

@@501Mobius but we gotta go oral traditions biblically , oral historically. depending on archaeological impermanent material data for about stories so very old is stupid. If we go through oral historical traditions which site is more plausible ?

[@501Mobius]

@@punitjayadev8043 I take the book of Genesis as being oral traditions. There are a lot of things that don't add up. After that there is plausibility in the other books so it could be matter of record keeping. Maybe not the best record keeping but with an underlying basis of truth. Some Exodus sites need toponyms to identify the various sites. However, some ignore facts in order to confirm the toponym. Take for instance Taberah. Lists of camps have a Taberah but somehow " the Lord and drove quail in from the sea" becomes a non-fact in several of them. Maybe Taberah should be at the shore. Note that leaving Al-Lawz to go to Kadesh there is a way to camp at the seashore. Not so with St. Catherines.

[@jjm6010]

One could almost run a YT channel just refuting Wyatt's findings.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

True, but it really wouldn't be worth it.

[@paradisecityX0]

Another favorite "issue" in defense of the documentary hypothesis is the Sinai/Horeb contention (and Jethro/Ruel for that matter)

[@BigJFindAWay]

Reuel likely was the father of Jethro.

[@justinr6006]

This video was very informative, thank you!

[@charlottemarand]

Thank you for another informative video. This one was really eye opening for me regarding Ron Wyatt.

[@DarkBlade37]

It’s spelled “Wrong Wyatt” around here.

[@charliedontsurf334]

I get this all the time at Church. Thanks for the explanation.

On Friday Night: Episode 169: "Dr. Falk cannot be the real Ark discoverer" 😂😂😂

[@JohnBaskette]

I used to take that idea seriously. But you have educated me correctly on the exodus. Thank you for your good work. Christianity will survive, even prevail, if Christians will be reasonable. Wack pseudoscience is terribly damaging. Thank you for your building of the church..

[@WhatYourPastorDidntTellYou]

Well said! Much appreciated

[@bc4yt]

"Why is it whenever something goes wrong, it's always you three?" *glares at Ron Wyatt* Need two more, who are they?! 😂

[@dannydement]

David Rohl, Douglas Petrovich.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

David Rohl and Scott Stripling? 😂

[@stephengray1344]

Douglas Petrovich and David Rohl?

[@bc4yt]

Heheheh 😊

[@bc4yt]

You know, I'm pretty new to all this and have a hard time keeping track of who's who. What say you we make up some trading cards with pictures of the culprits, good and bad, with their stats and abilities? 🤔

[@BabyYoda161]

Good points, thank you!

[@Me_Muhammad_Hussain]

Yeah but how did Moses depart from Egypt and go to mount Sinai as well as spend at least 40 days in Sinai if Sinai is in Egypt? And on the flip side if you take what Ron suggests as mount Sinai makes the departure from Egypt as more probable.

[@pper93]

Good content, however is there a strong case for the traditional site of sinai? Perhaps not? Paul refers to mt sinai in his allegory with mt. Zion.....Hagar & Sarah & refers to sinai being in Arabia, which is not really identified as the sinai peninsula?? It appears that Moses had to flee from pharoahs clutches...the sinai peninsula mayve been still within the reach of pharoahs' army & territory? The narrative also suggests that Moses was in midian & married the daughter of the priest of midian, Jethro. GOD appeared to Moses in the burning bush where he was living in exile & stated that He had chosen Moses to lead his people back to that place & to worship in this mountain, which presumably would be in the land of midian where Moses was living at the time... would like your take on these biblically related observations?

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

> Good content, however is there a strong case for the traditional site of sinai? Perhaps not? There's not a strong case for the traditional site of Mt. Sinai. But we cannot eliminated as an option like we can with Jebel al-Lawz. > Paul refers to mt sinai in his allegory with mt. Zion.....Hagar & Sarah & refers to sinai being in Arabia, which is not really identified as the sinai peninsula?? This was addressed in the video. Paul's use of Arabia is the Roman definition of the Province of Arabia, which included not only Midian but the Sinai Peninsula also. > It appears that Moses had to flee from pharoahs clutches...the sinai peninsula mayve been still within the reach of pharoahs' army & territory? Once you are three days out from Egypt, it would be practically impossible to find you out in the Sinai. The same tactic is done by the Muslim Brotherhood today. > The narrative also suggests that Moses was in midian & married the daughter of the priest of midian, Jethro. Moses was in Midian when he married Zipporah. > GOD appeared to Moses in the burning bush where he was living in exile & stated that He had chosen Moses to lead his people back to that place & to worship in this mountain, which presumably would be in the land of midian where Moses was living at the time... would like your take on these biblically related observations? The only problem with this is that Moses had taken his flocks "west of the wilderness" of Midian (Exod 3:1). This means he had to be in the Sinai Peninsula when he encountered the burning bush.

[@JJFrance]

Thanks!

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Thank you so much for your support of the channel!!! We really appreciate it. 😊

[@deiansalazar140]

I bet Ron Wyatt fanboys will just be screaming that you're just lying without countering everything in detail because they don't have proper arguments 😂

[@zach2382]

They’re not even doing watch the video they’re just don’t come and say that he’s lying

[@Jim-Mc]

Speaking of mountains, do you think as some traditions say, Mount Moriah could really be the Temple Mount or even Golgotha as others have said?

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

I don't think there's any serious doubt over Moriah being the Temple Mount.

[@carlknaack1019]

Recently there have been claims that amongst the pictographs are scores of Early Alphabetic inscriptions. While they have provided no proof of their existence, do you think it is possible for Nabatean characters and other glyphs to be confused for EA by an untrained eye.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Nabataean script can be easily confused for Early Alphabetic inscriptions, especially by non-experts. Nabataean script retains the ox-head alef and the y-shaped aiyin that are found in many EAIs. It's actually a hybrid script that is somewhere between EAIs and Aramaic scripts. But to the untrained eye, it can be easily mistaken.

[@carlknaack1019]

@@ancientegyptandthebibleYeah, I do notice that most people without training in EAIs mostly know about the Ox-head א without knowing about other characters. So if they see those characters they would assume it is EA when it could be Nabatean. Fascinating! Thank you!

[@j_peregrin3036]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to refute or verify your counter-arguments, but I thought the claim was that Jebel (Jabal?) Al-Lawz was Mt. Horeb and that Jebel/Jabal Maqla was Mt. Sinai.

[@a.t.ministries5376]

Mt Sinai and Mt Horeb are the same place, from my understanding of biblical exegesis and scholarship, so that clarification seems to not be aware of this.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Neither mountain is Horeb or Sinai. They are completely in the wrong places.

[@jeremias-serus]

Jebel and Jabal are the same thing, mountain in formal Arabic and most of the Arabic languages. The transcription reflects a more colloquial pronunciation of (specifically [ɛ] as opposed to [æ] or [a]). Same how many Arabic speakers pronounce what is Ahmad [ʔaħmad] in formal Arabic as Ahmed [ʔæħmɛd].

[@BiblicalArchaeologyAR]

@@jeremias-serus Jibal = Mountains (plural) جبال Jabal = Mountain (singular) جبل Jebel = Depending on how you pronounce it can mean any of the above.

[@morielrorschach8090]

So, there's plenty of room for different theories whether Israel crossed at Nuweiba or the strait of Tiran or some completely other place... But is it not clear that they "left Egypt" and crossed into Midian, while avoiding the way of the Philistines. Could you share when Egypt lost the Sinai peninsula, and that became Midian? As skeptical as we can be about each aspect of this proposed path... Is there another path with evidence that meets a higher standard of evidence (beyond "Constantine's mom said so")? Seems like placing the events "near" Pithom, within Goshen... That would be like me fleeing Seattle to the wilderness of Canada (and only making it as far as Everett).

[@lyongreene8241]

4:20 what is the newer lexigraphical work you mentioned?

[@Kakaragi]

Might you respond to the video "Does Bronze Age Archaeology Support the Bible?" on the channel UsefulCarts?

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

We will consider it.

[@JabberW00kie]

A “burned“ mountain top is not consistent with scripture anyway. Moses described the burning bush as being on fire yet not being burned up. If it isn’t burning up the bush, why would it burn the ground? Clearly, it is not meant to be seen as a fire in the physical sense, but a spiritual Holy fire.

[@carlknaack1019]

The point about the petroglyphs being Nabatean was good, and something I had speculated about myself. Many of these claims are vague possibilities, like a cave on the hill is ‘Elijah’s Cave.’ Evidence is necessary! I actually just watched a video on Jebel Al-Lawz, this was a very serendipitous post.

[@warluck1831]

where do you think is mt. Sinai?

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Somewhere inside the Sinai Peninsula.

[@warluck1831]

@@ancientegyptandthebible where do you think is the possible location of the crossing of the red sea? thank you for reply

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@warluck1831 That's a lot easier to locate. The reed sea is located near Pithom, Baal Zephon, Pihahiroth, and Migdol. Migdol is in the NW Sinai, Pithom is in the Wadi Tumilat, and Baal Zephon and Pihahiroth are in the southern region of the Pelusiac Estuary. Egyptian records state that the Reed Sea is between Piramesses and Tjaru. So, there is no doubt that the Reed Sea is in the southern proximity of the Pelusiac Estuary, which is in the Northwwest Sinai.

[@flippendad3532]

Question, how do you know the composition of the stone on top of Jabel Al lawz? It is fenced off and guarded by Iraqis. I doubt they are sending out soil samples to the public.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Because it is not only on top of Jebel al-Lawz, but elsewhere too. It is on the split rock and other rocks too.

[@flippendad3532]

Now of course you realize that is an assumption, something you are faulting others for.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@flippendad3532 The burden of proof doesn't rest with me. Those claiming it is not desert varnish have to show it is not given that it is found all over the place on the site.

[@flippendad3532]

That’s not a bad point, can you point to another site that has that much of it on top of a mountain? Coming from the mining industry, I can tell you plainly that fire creates a varnish on stone that makes it almost like porcelain at times, and it’s very dark. Even more so on brick. So how do we know that the desert varnish on top of the mountain was not created by fire instead of wind? Not trying to be argumentative, just offering real possibilities. Disproving someone because I think they are a false prophet becomes emotional and we look for data that fits with that emotion. Disproving them because we have uncovered factual data that’s absent of feeling is the better way to go. That means you have to leave the door open on some of your points, especially this one. The desert varnish you were referring to could absolutely have been caused by fire rather than wind. We don’t know for sure so I would not state it as fact.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@flippendad3532 > That’s not a bad point, can you point to another site that has that much of it on top of a mountain? Coming from the mining industry, I can tell you plainly that fire creates a varnish on stone that makes it almost like porcelain at times, and it’s very dark. Even more so on brick. So how do we know that the desert varnish on top of the mountain was not created by fire instead of wind? Desert varnish is much more commonly created by wind than by fire. And we know Jebel al-Lawz has not had any geothermal activity since before the Holocene period. Thus, it is exceptionally unlikely, particularly given desert varnish on everything else in the area, that something other than desert varnish turned the peak black. > Not trying to be argumentative, just offering real possibilities. One does have to be careful not to pursue the least likely hypothesis just because it is extremely remote. That's what the ancient aliens people do. > Disproving someone because I think they are a false prophet becomes emotional and we look for data that fits with that emotion. That slips into ad hominem reasoning, so again we have be careful to make those inferences of bias. > Disproving them because we have uncovered factual data that’s absent of feeling is the better way to go. I think so, and I think we have done that. > That means you have to leave the door open on some of your points, especially this one. No, that doesn't follow. One does not have to leave the door open on any possibility. One does not have to leave open the possibility that al-Lawz was an ancient alien landing pad. One also does not have to leave open the idea al-Lawz was made black by dragon fire-breath. And one doesn't even need to be open to the idea that the blackening was created by fire. The reason is the preponderance of evidence speaks against those possibilities. It is a better epistemic position to follow the evidence, than it is to be open to any possibility. > The desert varnish you were referring to could absolutely have been caused by fire rather than wind. We don’t know for sure so I would not state it as fact. And what would be the source of that heat? What is the evidence for that? We have lots of evidence that all the other varnish in the area was caused by wind. This sounds a lot like special pleading.

[@markmcflounder15]

This guy is so awesome: our Christian Egyptoligist version of the Simpson's comic book guy. In transition, what a tremendous disappointment PoE & Jabal Al-Laus has been. I used to be so excited about PoE. What a bummer. It's been like 10 years since I saw video of Jabal Al-Laus. But, I recollect at the base of those giant rocks a hole & the erosion around it appeared to be liquid.

[@BigJFindAWay]

Your channel is brilliant. I love all of your videos and find myself agreeing with them almost entirely most of the time. But I’m going to have to make an exception for this one even though I sure do admire how thorough you were in it. Claim 1: Exodus 14:3 is not about the situation the Israelites were in but where Pharaoh believed they were in. These were Pharaoh’s words. His take on the matter. Claim 2: I would love to see any videos you might have on the true numbers of the Exodus because I have my own theory of what those numbers mean and you’re right. It’s not 3 million people. Claims 3 and 4 you’re right. These claims make no sense. Claim 5: True there’s no sand bridge but there is a shallower spot there than what surrounds it. It’s 2400 feet below the water but that’s shallow compared to the trenches that exist to its north and to its south. Claim 6: True there are no such chariot wheels but there sure are weird looking coral formations. Coral eats up what it grows on but can maintain its shape for centuries afterward especially where there is no reef. Reefs exist all over the Gulf of Aqaba but not on that sandy bed. Claim 7: It’s rubbish just as you say it is. No such things exist though on the Saudi side there are little coral formations that look suspiciously like horseshoes. Claim 8: the columns were possibly placed there to mark the site of the crossing. Claim 9: There were two splittings of rocks. The one in Numbers 20:11 is where Moses sinned by striking the rock where God instructed him to speak to it. But there was also the one at Rephidim prior, where Moses was instructed to strike it in Exodus 17:6. The verse in Isaiah 48:21 does seem to say, given the Hebrew used, that the rock was split. Also the Hebrew word used in the Isaiah verse is בקע which doesn’t only mean split but also break through. Break through to what? Something below? Also it doesn’t say anywhere that a spring existed there hence this may have been groundwater from deep underneath the rock and thus a greater miracle. Indeed there actually are at least three aquifers in that general vicinity of northeast Arabia. As far as the smooth stones go, I would think that if they were smoothed by wind erosion they wouldn’t be smooth but would have a sandblasted texture as wind there would blow lots of sand and particulates about. Claim 10: Exodus 3:1 in Hebrew doesn’t say the west side of Midian. It says “behind the desert” and this may well be in the vicinity where you start getting these aquifers I mentioned, hence provender might exist for the flocks. The verse also says חורבה which means ‘in the direction of Horeb’. I’ve struggled with the question as to what the difference is between Sinai and Horeb and it’s my view that Sinai is a catch all name for the entire desert while Horeb is the mountain chain where Mt Sinai is located. Also ים סוף does not mean ‘Sea of Reeds’ that’s a common misconception many scholars have. It means ‘Sea at the end’ almost like Lands End in the UK. Claim 11. You’re not going to find remains of a temporary camp from 3400 years ago on that I agree. Remains would have disappeared long ago. Claim 12. Moses would surely have broken down that altar. Claim 13. You make a good point about the pillars. Even so I’m not sure that the term מצבה completely rules out it being a pillar. Claim 14. Why would there be a corral there for nomads in the middle of nowhere? Claim 15. The Nabateans were partially Israelite in origin. They are descended from Moab and Ammon who absorbed large numbers of Reubenites and Gadites and possibly some Levites too. The peoples of that region had very similar cultures to that of Israel and some of them including Midian worshipped the God of Israel hence Zippora knowing how to circumcise her son. Claim 16: maybe it’s just me but desert varnish aside Jebel Al Lawz does in all the pictures look darker than the surrounding mountains. One last thing I need to mention. The claim of Jebel al Lawz being Mt Sinai doesn’t originate with Ron Wyatt but with Josephus who apparently went there. And as I understand it Josephus based it on ancient local traditions.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

> Your channel is brilliant. I love all of your videos and find myself agreeing with them almost entirely most of the time. But I’m going to have to make an exception for this one even though I sure do admire how thorough you were in it. That's fine. You don't have to agree with everything I say. But I think you've made a few missteps here. So, let's go through this with careful reason. > Claim 1: Exodus 14:3 is not about the situation the Israelites were in but where Pharaoh believed they were in. These were Pharaoh’s words. His take on the matter. I agree, but it's not really relevant. The Wyatt supporters misread "wilderness" as "mountains." That's the claim. The Wyatt supporters are clearly wrong, regardless of who said the words. > Claim 2: I would love to see any videos you might have on the true numbers of the Exodus because I have my own theory of what those numbers mean and you’re right. It’s not 3 million people. We have a video coming up on this subject. It should be out soon. > Claims 3 and 4 you’re right. These claims make no sense. I'm glad we agree. > Claim 5: True there’s no sand bridge but there is a shallower spot there than what surrounds it. It’s 2400 feet below the water but that’s shallow compared to the trenches that exist to its north and to its south. I think that's an insurmountable problem. Because you have to multiply miracles to make a crossing here happen. If it is 2400 ft below the water, it might as well be 10,000 ft. The results are the same. It is impossible for a wind to divide waters that are that deep, unless you start compounding miracles in ways that the Bible doesn't even suggest. At that point, you are no longer doing exegesis, but reading what you want into the text. > Claim 6: True there are no such chariot wheels but there sure are weird looking coral formations. Coral eats up what it grows on but can maintain its shape for centuries afterward especially where there is no reef. Reefs exist all over the Gulf of Aqaba but not on that sandy bed. The Gulf of Aqaba and particularly Nuweiba Beach is not strictly a sand bed. It is a rocky sand bed. The corals generally attach to rocks that are encrusted with coraline algae. Tides expose the rocks on the sea floor and the corals attack to the rocks. > Claim 7: It’s rubbish just as you say it is. No such things exist though on the Saudi side there are little coral formations that look suspiciously like horseshoes. Well, that would be a problem since the Egyptians did not use horseshoes. > Claim 8: the columns were possibly placed there to mark the site of the crossing. How do you know that? It's not mentioned in the Bible. This was a story that was invented by Ron Wyatt. Everything we know about these columns suggests that they were Nabataean, not Solomonic. > Claim 9: There were two splittings of rocks. The one in Numbers 20:11 is where Moses sinned by striking the rock where God instructed him to speak to it. But there was also the one at Rephidim prior, where Moses was instructed to strike it in Exodus 17:6. The verse in Isaiah 48:21 does seem to say, given the Hebrew used, that the rock was split. Also the Hebrew word used in the Isaiah verse is בקע which doesn’t only mean split but also break through. Break through to what? Something below? Also it doesn’t say anywhere that a spring existed there hence this may have been groundwater from deep underneath the rock and thus a greater miracle. Indeed there actually are at least three aquifers in that general vicinity of northeast Arabia. As far as the smooth stones go, I would think that if they were smoothed by wind erosion they wouldn’t be smooth but would have a sandblasted texture as wind there would blow lots of sand and particulates about. Miracles explain everything, don't they? One miracle doesn't suffice, add a second miracle. It is clear that these were already existing water source, which is why the Amalekites attacked at Rephidim. The Amalekites did not travel to Midian. They inhabited the Sinai and Negev. Isa 48:21 just means to "beak." "Split" is a traditional rendering. > Claim 10: Exodus 3:1 in Hebrew doesn’t say the west side of Midian. It says “behind the desert” and this may well be in the vicinity where you start getting these aquifers I mentioned, hence provender might exist for the flocks. The verse also says חורבה which means ‘in the direction of Horeb’. I’ve struggled with the question as to what the difference is between Sinai and Horeb and it’s my view that Sinai is a catch all name for the entire desert while Horeb is the mountain chain where Mt Sinai is located. Also ים סוף does not mean ‘Sea of Reeds’ that’s a common misconception many scholars have. It means ‘Sea at the end’ almost like Lands End in the UK. Exod 3:1 states "he led the flock to the west side of the wilderness, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God." "Behind the desert" is the west. That is the only interpretation that makes any sense at all, because there is nothing but desert to the east of the wilderness. Sure, you might find an aquifer, but you aren't going to find feed for your sheep. You would never pasture sheep east of the wilderness. The Arabia desert contained nothing but desert and sand. At least in the Late Bronze Age, Sinai still had savannas and grasslands. Sinai and Horeb are synonyms. Moreover, "yom suf" means exact "sea of reeds." You are confusing classical and middle Hebrew lexemes. "suf" as used in the Book of Exodus always means "reeds." For example, Exod 2:3 "Then she put the child into it, and set it among the reeds (suf) by the bank of the Nile" and Exod 2:5 "she saw the basket among the reeds (suf) and sent her maid." The idea that "yom suf" means "sea at the end" is bad linguistic perpetuated by supporters of this view. > Claim 11. You’re not going to find remains of a temporary camp from 3400 years ago on that I agree. Remains would have disappeared long ago. Cool! > Claim 12. Moses would surely have broken down that altar. Then why claim this was an altar? > Claim 13. You make a good point about the pillars. Even so I’m not sure that the term מצבה completely rules out it being a pillar. Oh, it does. We have plenty of examples of matzebot, e.g., at Shechem. It's not a pillar, at least not what we would call a pillar. > Claim 14. Why would there be a corral there for nomads in the middle of nowhere? It's a way-station for people passing through. You find these scattered throughout the region. It's not meant to be a permanent corral. It's just to keep the animals together for a night to get some sleep before moving on. > Claim 15. The Nabateans were partially Israelite in origin. They are descended from Moab and Ammon who absorbed large numbers of Reubenites and Gadites and possibly some Levites too. The peoples of that region had very similar cultures to that of Israel and some of them including Midian worshipped the God of Israel hence Zippora knowing how to circumcise her son. Sure, I have no problem with that. > Claim 16: maybe it’s just me but desert varnish aside Jebel Al Lawz does in all the pictures look darker than the surrounding mountains. And yet you find black desert varnish all over the place there, even on the so-called split rock. That Jebel Al-Lawz has more desert varnish is caused by its elevation and exposure to the blowing sands. > One last thing I need to mention. The claim of Jebel al Lawz being Mt Sinai doesn’t originate with Ron Wyatt but with Josephus who apparently went there. And as I understand it Josephus based it on ancient local traditions. I have the complete works of Josephus. Nowhere in his works does he claim to have travelled to Jebel al-Lawz, Mount Sinai, or Arabia. This appears to be another misreading of Arabia similar to how Paul's reference to Arabia in Galatians is misread. But let's say that reading is correct and it is based on local traditions, then you run in the onamastica problem. Local traditions particularly in the Roman period are notoriously inaccurate, so inaccurate that they are worse than useless.

[@jeannet7443]

Whether or not the "real" Mt. Sinai is in Saudi Arabia, are there any actual, credible archeological finds around St. Catherine's to suggest this is indeed the Mt. Sinai where Moses received the Ten Commandments and the events that occurred in the Exodus account? It is a popular site for Christian tour groups who travel to the Holy Land, frequently as an "add-on" to these trips, and I never hear anyone questioning its authenticity. Personally, I would not waste my time or money going there. I am very skeptical of many of these "traditional" claims. Didn't Constantine's mother start this? How did she come to that conclusion? Why should we believe her? Do the Biblical details of the Exodus support THIiS particular site as the real Mt. Sinai? Were the Israelites wandering in the Sinai peninsula for 4O years, or somewhere else? Where is the evidence?

[@mercianthane2503]

St. Catherine's Mt. Sinai is not Sinai, at all.

[@jeannet7443]

​@@mercianthane2503 I agree. I would like to see archaeological evidence, not tradition established by Constantine's mother, that the site in the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula is a credible candidate for the real Mt. Sinai, where Moses received the Ten Commandments, where he stood in front of the burning bush. The Bible explicitly states in many passages that the Hebrews went "out of Egypt". You can do a search in a Bible app of "out of Egypt" and see the results. The Sinai Peninsula is not "out of Egypt".

[@winstedwildmanresearch]

This site is not just another "Ron Wyatt" claim. This has evolved way beyond the controversial Ron Wyatt.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Unfortunately, the standard of evidence has not improved since Wyatt.

[@danielmalinen6337]

Archaeologist and filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici used biblical descriptions and a map to locate where Mt. Sinai or Mt. Horeb is located according to the texts and the surprising thing was that it is not located at the tip of the Sinai Peninsula as traditionally imagined, but in the area that remains inside the triangle formed by Elim (a 14-day journey), Kadesh Barnea (an 11-day journey) and Timna (a distance where goats can be herded). According to some researchers, the reason why the place is so precisely defined in the Bible is that it was used as a holy place during the era of the kingdoms.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Simcha Jacobovici is an idiot, but he's a litigious idiot.

[@501Mobius]

That would be Hashem El Tarif. However, it fails the tests. There is no second yam suf for Num. 33:10 on the way. There is no sea to camp next to at Taberah for Num. 11 on the journey to Kadesh Barnea. It is less than 11 days travel to Kadesh Barnea. It is only 6 days away. It also is not on the Mt. Sier road.

[@zach2382]

It does have a weird looking rock that’s about it

[@bc4yt]

Another great debunking. Personally I'm curious about the split stone - I could easily buy it not having the usual wares to be a spring, if it's a miraculous water source. But, I'm guessing it's very far away from where it should be? 🤔

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

It's supposed by near Kadesh. Maybe, it moved to this location miraculously.

[@bc4yt]

@@ancientegyptandthebible 😁😁😁

[@AshleyLambley]

😂 Paul tells us in the new testament that mount Sinai is in Arabia Nice try, I'm not a Wyatt fan either, Especially because of the ark of the covenant stuff The original Mt Sinai is called mount Sinai because that's where Constantine's mother said it was 🤣🤣🤣

[@vanuaturly]

Paul is referring to the Roman province of Arabia, not modern borders.

[@AshleyLambley]

@@vanuaturly The Roman Empire gained what became the province of Arabia Petraea (modern southern Jordan and north west Saudi Arabia). Where is Jebel al-Lawz located? North west Saudi Arabia Thank you for rebutting my claim

[@vanuaturly]

@AshleyLambley modern southern Jordan, northwest Saudi Arabia and Sinai. Which includes a whole LOT of mountains other than Jebel al laws. Also, why would Paul have any clue where it was? (Other than reading the old testament himself)

[@501Mobius]

From a remake of an ancient map, it does look like the Roman province of Arabia Petrea included Petra, Avara (Arabah valley) and the Central Sinai Peninsula mountains. Its western border extended to the top of the Gulf of Suez. The southern border was the Midian mountains (or so it appears) with Arabia Felix beyond. So Paul doesn't narrow down the location.

[@AshleyLambley]

@@501Mobius that's fair enough Paul's not specific about it's location But why didn't he say its in Egypt?

[@MarkSmith-jp6cr]

I like to see him go throw the Vatican library.He would love to get lost in that.

[@lanabowers5332]

Serabit el Khadim is 'Mt. Sinai', or the mountain of Moses. Greek Christian monks named it that 1700 years later

[@phearlesspharaoh3697]

Putz… Wyatt may have been a bit questionable, but you’re a rank Amateur. Did you REALLY call yourself an egyptian scholar? 😂🤣

[@justusmorton6555]

He has a PhD in Egyptology so... yeah, he is a scholar of ancient Egypt.

[@elleaaaron6775]

There are the twelve pillars there, the remnants on an altar, as well as a cave that Elijah slept in. There is no such features on the traditional Mt. Sinai location.

[@jeannet7443]

Archaeology is our friend. Even if the erosion around the big rock in Saudi Arabia is not caused by water, did the rock that Moses struck/spoke to, wherever it may be, actually split? When Moses struck it in Exodus 17 and again in Numbers 20, the text doesn't tell us that it "split" in either passage, only that water came out. Or am I missing something?

[@an_nie_dyc1386]

Not convincing at all. First you say Nuweiba is a SMALL beach, then you claim that just because there is a LARGE beach musst not mean the people of Israel must have been there. Then you say the mountains are no wilderness because wilderness means desert - the area surrounding Nuweiba beach IS a desert with mountains. No plants at all, only rocks and sand. Do that are Stränden arguments. And the stone you showed in the end of the video looks not like the peak of the mountain at all, it is shining brown while the Jebel Al lawz is black and raw - as the only one in the area as we can see from drone footage.

[@ronikurniawan4889]

Bad

[@PastorBrian1969]

I am not an adherent of Wyatt, but that does not make all of his conclusions wrong. On the other hand, much learning hath made thee mad, as the Bible plainly states (Exodus 12:37-38) that there were 600,000 Isrealite men that came up out of Egypt. So your assertion, around 4:20 time frame, that modern "scholarship" has determined a fall smaller number is fraudulent on it's arrival. I don't know exactly where Mt. Sinai is, but I do know from Galatians that it IS in Arabia. Most likely it is Jebel al-Laws, but if it is or is not, does not really matter doctrinally speaking. What does matter is that you have perverted the plain reading of the Word of God (please don't bore me with Greek, Hebrew, Chaldean, Septuagint vs. TR, etc, etc. lessons, I am familiar with all the arguments) in favor of your own conclusions. God's Word is true and factually correct, not only in the "original autographs", but in the Bible I hold in my hand today. If we cannot trust nor believe the Bible on relatively minor issues, how on earth can we believe that God the Creator became flesh, died for our sins, and rose again the third day? The same Bible makes both claims, you cannot believe one and disregard the other, without casting doubt on all of the Biblical narrative. Study the Bible, not the works of "scholars". Ecclesiastes 12:12 And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. Romans 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar...

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Did you know that the Arabia referenced by Paul is not the same definition of Arabia that we use today? Or are you just spouting worthless opinions?

[@PastorBrian1969]

@ancientegyptandthebible I am well aware of geography, both ancient and modern, as I also attended and earned multiple degrees from institutions of what i now consider "lower learning". I will not engage you in any more "discussion" as you are an angry and prideful fellow. Meanwhile, I'll continue to preach the Gospel and win souls, as you continue to cast doubt upon God's Word. Genesis 3:1 ...Yea, hath God said... Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

[@501Mobius]

It also plainly states in Numbers 3:43 The total number of firstborn males a month old or more, listed by name, was 22,273. That means there were only 22,273 fathers within 603,550 males age of 20 years and older. 27 males age 20 and more in each household. Or a population model of about 76 children per couple. That may have trouble with reality. If you are going to read plainly then Ex 1:11, Ex. 12:37, Num 33:3 and Num 33:5 plainly says the Israelites left from Ramesses.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@501Mobius Excellent observation!!! Cudos!!!

[@deiansalazar140]

​@@PastorBrian1969lol you ducked out and can't even make a convincing counter-argument towards the original 16 points sure it's about pride sure

[@TheRealDaddyAbe]

I like your analysis and logic going through the text to come to your conclusions but I still don’t see it being stronger evidence than what the geographical features of the region and archaeology suggest. Just my opinion but to me it seems that Jebal Al Lawz is still a viable candidate for being Mt Sinai. this is coming strictly from a layman’s analytical analysis of the scholarship and archaeology. not theologically driven.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Jabel al-Lawz cannot be Mt. Sinai because the Sea of Reeds cannot be the Gulf of Aqaba. That's pretty much the end of the matter.

[@TheRealDaddyAbe]

@@ancientegyptandthebible you cannot prove that the redactions made to the book of Exodus In the Hebrew language, claimed to have been written by Moses that states Moses parted the reed sea is actually older than what we find in the oldest complete copy of the Septuagint. The Ancient Greek phrase erythra thalassa is clearly translated into red sea, and it is the oldest complete version of the translation of the so-called Hebrew Bible. The redactors that made changes to the Torah later on in time which is all we have, could have made a mistake. Therefore, the basis of the claim about the red sea is totally coming from a place of irrelevance.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@TheRealDaddyAbe I'm not claiming redactions were made to the Book of Exodus. Are you? The fact is that we know where the reed sea is based upon its relative geography in the Bible and extra-Biblical sources that confirm that geography.

[@TheRealDaddyAbe]

@@ancientegyptandthebible Well that’s a big can of worms there. I wouldn’t make the claim to know when and where redactions were made, what I do suggest though is that the details in the the story may be anachronistic due to not having what Moses originally possessed that we would call the Torah. Not only are the details Anachronistic but they contradict what’s written in the Greek sources, for example like the difference between Red Sea & Reed Sea. This discrepancy is just one of many. in a nutshell, what I am proposing that is if we are to determine the reality from an archaeological perspective, we must first establish the correct data and details about the story.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@TheRealDaddyAbe The Greek sources are very late and not at all reliable. The earliest and best sources point to the Reed Sea being in the Northwest Sinai.

[@user-si7ig6ul7l]

Glad more are exposing the con artist Wyatt

[@kingdom-of-yah]

he is not a con artist. careful how you judge people you don't know

[@davidjanbaz7728]

​@@kingdom-of-yahtotally ignorant and NOT an archeologist.

[@magistradox39]

It has nothing to do with Ron Wyatt. There are many others who don't even mention him and come to the same conclusion.

[@deiansalazar140]

​@@magistradox39this video just debunked it you all can't make a coherent counter to the scholarly facts and points in this video 😂

[@deiansalazar140]

​@@kingdom-of-yahthis video just debunked it you all can't make a coherent counter to the scholarly facts and points in this video 😂

[@SpiritLevel888]

The worlds full of warped 'n' twisted logic. The mind is Satan's realm... perspective matters. The Holy Spirit tells me Jebel al-Lewz IS Mt. Sinai.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

The Holy Spirit told me Jebel al-Lawz is NOT Mt. Sinai. I think I've got the real Holy Spirit since he told me how to spell Jebel al-Lawz correctly. 😂

[@magnusbrzenk447]

I appreciate hearing your perspectives BUT: i. please stop shooting down all the fun theories out there, ii. your white-wall background could be way more interesting; how about some Biblio-Egyptian paraphernalia?

[@davidjanbaz7728]

Stay on topic!!!

[@raven2000ka2]

Jebel al-Lawz IS Mount Sinai. This video is just utter nonsense.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@raven2000ka2 According to whom? And how do you know Jebel al-Lawz is Mt. Sinai? Did you even understand what was said?

[@JohnGrillo-r6n]

The Bible is our best source for identifying the true Mount Sinai's (or Mount Horeb's) location or site. The apostle Paul clearly informs us, and identifies that "... Sinai, [is] a mountain in Arabia, ..." in his book, epistle, or letter, to the Galatian Christians at Galatians Chapter 4: Verse 25 (NWT or New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures). I'm more inclined to believe the inspired writers of the Bible, particularly the apostle Paul on this issue, and not uninspired 20th, and 21st centuries C.E. (or Common Era's) confusion or conflicting accounts; on Biblical history, archaeology, and traditions, such as Mount Sinai's past location in the Egyptian Peninsula. The Peninsula is located in northeastern Africa, Arabia is located in southwestern Asia. Some geologists ascribe the Gulf of Aqaba (the "right arm" of the Red Sea) as the dividing line based on fault lines and/or plate tectonics as separating the continents of northeastern Africa from Southwestern Asia. The apostle Paul by claiming Mount Sinai was located in Arabia ascertains Sinai's true location as being Asian in origin, NOT African.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

> The Bible is our best source for identifying the true Mount Sinai's (or Mount Horeb's) location or site. The apostle Paul clearly informs us, and identifies that "... Sinai, [is] a mountain in Arabia, ..." in his book, epistle, or letter, to the Galatian Christians at Galatians Chapter 4: Verse 25 (NWT or New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures). You didn't watch the video, did you? Paul uses the Roman definition of "Arabia" which includes the Sinai and extends all the way to the border of Egypt. > I'm more inclined to believe the inspired writers of the Bible, particularly the apostle Paul on this issue, and not 20th, and 21st centuries C.E. (or Common Era's) confusion of conflicting accounts on Biblical history, archaeology, and traditions, such as Mount Sinai's past location in the Egyptian Peninsula. You know nothing about historical geography.

[@JohnGrillo-r6n]

Yes, I did watch the video. However, I respectfully disagree with your argument(s) refuting Mount Sinai's (physical) geographical site as not being in what is today the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Paul (or "Paulus") was a Roman citizen, and the Roman Empire designated Latin names for its empire domains, such as Paul being born in the city of Tarsus, in the Roman province of ancient CILICIA as part of Asia Minor, in what is today southern Turkey (or Türkiye). I do have a degree in World History from California State University, Northridge. I recognize the Bible as the authority on Biblical Middle Eastern lands, empires, and kingdoms, and the writer authors as inspired by God. As for the Bible, I've read it three times from Genesis to Revelation, excluding the Apocrypha which I believe are "deuterocanonical" books, and while having historical merit, were not considered part of the inspired writings in both the so-called "New Testament" and "Old Testament." @ancientegyptandthebible

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@JohnGrillo-r6n > Yes, I did watch the video. However, I respectfully disagree with your argument(s) refuting Mount Sinai's (physical) geographical site as not being in what is today the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Paul (or "Paulus") was a Roman citizen, and the Roman Empire designated Latin names for its empire domains, such as Paul being born in the city of Tarsus, in the Roman province of ancient CILICIA as part of Asia Minor, in what is today southern Turkey (or Türkiye). You may disagree with my argument, but you haven't engaged it. All you've done is asserted what you believe. > I do have a degree in World History from California State University, Northridge. I recognize the Bible as the authority on Biblical Middle Eastern lands, empires, and kingdoms, and the writer authors as inspired by God. So you have a BA. That doesn't mean you understand what is being written in the Bible. > As for the Bible, I've read it three times from Genesis to Revelation, excluding the Apocrypha which I believe are "deuterocanonical" books, and while having historical merit, were not considered part of the inspired writings in both the so-called "New Testament" and "Old Testament. Again, you might get a bit further if you actually engage the arguments instead of asserting your opinion.

[@JohnGrillo-r6n]

@@ancientegyptandthebible What I have stated in my email to you and reply is NOT all opinion, much of what I have attempted to communicate with you IS fact (geographical, historical, and geological) supporting my argument in opposition to your views and what your conclusions may be. I try to avoid speculation and will not attempt to propose arguments and/or theses pro and con in what I believe are insufficient, or erroneous grounds to create suppositions and arrive at conclusions. In your argument refuting Mount Sinai's location as being in Saudi Arabia, namely "Jebel al-Lawz" does not agree with my investigations and studies.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@JohnGrillo-r6n > What I have stated in my email to you and reply is NOT all opinion, much of what I have attempted to communicate with you IS fact (geographical, historical, and geological) supporting my argument in opposition to your views and what your conclusions may be. But you haven't shown that. You've only asserted that. You have tried to position yourself as an authority, but you aren't an authority. Sorry, but I'm not going to accept something simply because you assert it. > I try to avoid speculation and will not attempt to propose arguments and/or theses pro and con in what I believe are insufficient, or erroneous grounds to create suppositions and arrive at conclusions. In your argument refuting Mount Sinai's location as being in Saudi Arabia, namely "Jebel al-Lawz" does not agree with my investigations and studies. You've shown no evidence. All you've done is asserted a questionable reading. Do you know how that proof thing works? Right now, I don't believe you're a serious interlocutor. And at this point, I'm about to shake the dust off my feet with a time-waster.

[@skydivingcomrade1648]

This video is a strawman argument.

[@zach2382]

No it is not those are literally his claims. You just don’t want to accept it because actually I don’t know why.

[@skydivingcomrade1648]

Galatians 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.​ Galatians 1:17, the biblical text points to Arabia being the location, in the land of Midian, the sinai peninsula has always been Egyptian. The Red sea is not a mistranslation for Reeds or sea of reeds. God didn't drown the entire Egyptian army (horses and chariots ) in 4 feet of brackish water. Midian has always been south of Israel not west of it. Holding to long proven falsehoods is not helping your argument. The argument over interpretation of data insitu will always remain by those who are unreasonable @zach2382

[@zach2382]

@@skydivingcomrade1648 you didn’t watch the video he already addressed this

[@skydivingcomrade1648]

@@zach2382 You will not change your mind and Neither will I. I just have a more rational position. The majority of the "evidence" that is trotted out is irrelevant to the location. Jebel El laws may not be Mt sinai, but the one in eygypt is definitely not it.

[@zach2382]

@@skydivingcomrade1648 it is the one in Egypt just accept it

[@misskay8790]

Dude…these arguments are WEAK. Seriously. You have it out for Wyatt. Who’s paying you to try to debunk him?

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Dude... you're momma is paying me. Go talk to her. 😂

[@501Mobius]

You have to separate the beach and crossing from the mountain location. If two 2300 foot walls of water separated by 300 feet or 4 miles were to suddenly be released to crash together there would have been a tsunami up and down the Gulf of Aqaba the likes of which haven't happened on this earth for 66 million years (Chicxulub impact). It would have been hundreds of feet high. Every coastal town along the gulf would have been wiped off the map. Ezion Geber, Eilat and Al Maqnah would have ceased to exist. The Israelites, even if a mile inland, would have all been killed. However, there are no scars or scour marks along the shoreline of anything like this. Nor were Ezion Geber and Al Maqnah destroyed. Thus we know the sea parting did not happen in the Gulf of Aqaba.

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

@@501Mobius Great point!

[@billysmith6284]

Dribble

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Next time, excuse yourself, and go use the restroom. There's no excuse for wetting your pants.

[@FaithRaitano]

I beg you all to read Galatians 4:25 Mt Sinai in Egypt is now making money as tourist site. While Mt. Sinai in Arabia is preserved as Holly site. Can't y'all see? I beg you all to read.🤌

[@ancientegyptandthebible]

Do you realize that "Arabia" in Gal 4:25 is the Roman province of Arabia which extends from the border of Egypt, across the Sinai, and into the Arabian peninsula? I beg you all to try to actually understand what you are reading. For pity sake, please read other books on ancient geography so you actually know what you are reading.