TESTIMONY OF ADVENTURERS AND SCHOLARS ON MOUNT SINAI

For centuries now, Bible scholars have been puzzled as to where the real Mt. Sinai is located. Most people are unaware that little evidence supports that what is called “Mt. Sinai” in the Sinai Peninsula — where the monastery of St. Catharine sits — is indeed the famed mountain of Exodus. Biblical scholars have suggested several proposed alternate sites for Mt. Sinai, but neither is there a body of compelling archaeological evidence to support these claims.

Several recent popularizations on the subject have challenged the traditional Sinai Peninsula location suggesting an alternate site of Jabal al-Lawz, or Mt. Musa (Moses) in Saudi Arabia.^1,2,3 In turn, these popular books have spawned TV documentaries such as “The Search for the Real Mt. Sinai” which aired in 2002 on the Discovery channel. The advocacy position of these offerings often runs roughshod over the patient scholarly inquiry that might be hoped for on so important a topic. Jabal al-Lawz is the site upheld as the mountain of God by local Arab tradition, and it is needful to point out that Islam holds high respect for Moses as one of God’s prophets. The Koran attempts to accurately convey the sense of Moses’ warnings and promises to Israel, all of this a part of the complex interplay between the children of Israel and the children of Midian that dates back to the Exodus.

“Bear in mind the words of Moses to his people, ‘Remember, my people, the favors which Allah has bestowed upon you. He raised up prophets among you, made you kings, and given that which He has given to no other nation. Enter, my people, the holy land which has been assigned for you. Do not turn back, or you shall be ruined.’ ”^⁴

To be impartial and objective, the claims made in the books advocating the Jabal al-Lawz site for Mt. Sinai do not meet the high standards for careful fieldwork that is the hallmark of professional archeologists. Indeed, the authors make a case that the archeology at the most promising alternate sites has been made impossible by the Saudi government. The Saudis have fenced in the entire area around Jabal al-Lawz as a military reservation and the trespasses reported in these books were furtive and high-risk adventures. The most remarkable claim, again unsubstantiated, goes so far as to suggest that using Chinese technology, the military reservation about Mt. Musa was under development as a missile and radar site for operations against Israel.

Leaving aside the claims of the adventurers, the scholarly community has also weighed in, recognizing that the alternative site in Saudi Arabia deserves consideration. Most notable is the eminent 20th century Orientalist Professor James B. Pritchard in his final book. While retaining the traditional site of Mount Sinai as his first choice, he holds open the possibility of the “less likely” alternate site in Arabia.

“The location of Mt. Sinai (or Mt. Horeb as it is known in some texts) is a particular problem and over a dozen sites have been proposed for it. Much of the evidence used in the discussion is insufficiently precise for the purpose (e.g. volcanic features in Exodus 19 may belong to the later elaboration of Sinai events and need not imply [Editor’s note: This challenge to accurate transmission of scripture, and suggestion that embellishment takes place over time if NOT true, as indeed we believe, strongly implies] that Mt. Sinai was actually a volcano and therefore located in northwest Arabia) and some of it perhaps relates to a distinct “mountain of God” (Exodus 3:1, 4:27, 18:5) rather than to Sinai. The clearest evidence is found in Deuteronomy 1:2. It is eleven days journey from Horeb by way of Mt. Seir to Kadesh-Barnea. This points to the South of the Sinai Peninsula … or less likely to a mountain east of the gulf of Aqaba.”^⁵

Again from the scholarly community, Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review says, “Jabal al-Lawz is the most likely site for Mount Sinai, but we need a serious archeological investigation.”⁶

However, in an effort to be consistent with scriptural testimony, and assuming that there is at least some merit to the evidence presented in the works of the adventurers and the scholarly community, we find support for the startling conclusion that the real Mt. Sinai, the mountain of God, may indeed be in Saudi Arabia, the ancient land of Midian at a location called Jabal al-Lawz, or Mount Musa (Moses).

WHERE IS “ARABIA”?

Recognizing this uncertainty as to the site, we wish to understand precisely what the Apostle Paul meant when he said in Galatians 4:25, “Now this Hagar is Mt. Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.” While scripture upholds that Mt. Sinai is in “Arabia,” this is ambiguous as to location when we learn that in the Apostle’s day, the entire Roman frontier with the Nabateans would have been considered to be “Arabia.”⁷ This would have included most of the Sinai Peninsula away from the coastal territories that constituted the way of the Philistines. We recall that divine providence purposely had the children of Israel avoid this route and its inevitable warfare (Exodus 13:17). Arabia would of course extend all the way to present day Saudi Arabia. Recognizing this, both of the leading sites for Mt. Sinai qualify as “Arabia.”

MOSES IN MIDIAN

But if “Arabia” is a broad term, “Midian” is much more delimiting. During his forty years of exile, Moses fled to Midian and there kept the flocks of Jetrho his father-in-law, which would mean a wide ranging over the land of Midian. There he helped Jethro’s daughters water the sheep in Midian (Exodus 2:16-19). Moses was married to Zipporah and lived in Midian; and Hobab, Moses’ brother-in-law, also lived in Midian. As we read in Exodus 3:1, Moses was shepherding the flock of Jethro — his father-in-law the priest of Midian — “so he led forth his flock behind the desert” and God called Moses at the Burning Bush, presumably in Midian.

But we need to observe that according to Exodus 18:5, 27, Jethro of Midian met with Moses in the wilderness at the mount of God, then “went the way (returned) into his own land (Midian).” Hence, there must have been at least some separation between Jethro’s principal residence and the Mount of the Law, so that he could be accounted as returning to his own country. (See also Numbers 10:29-30, 33, for the mount being distinct from Midian.)

Most scholars, including Prof. Pritchard’s work already cited, agree that Midian is in the area of northwest Saudi Arabia, and even part of southern Jordan. The proponents of Jabal al-Lawz often point to the interview of Prof. Frank Moore Cross of Harvard University in Bible Review as their authority on this point.8 However, Gordon Franz, of the Associates for Biblical Research — one of the thoughtful and literate opponents of the Jabal al-Lawz site — claims to have a letter from Prof. Cross which states his rejection of the evidence of the proponents of Jabal al-Lawz even thought he still believes Mt. Sinai is in Midian.⁹ Clearly this debate is energetic, and far from settled.

Those who challenge the traditional site for the Mount of the Law claim that the area around Mt. Sinai does not possess sufficient room for a camp and herds. But a few days distant there is need for battleground to fight the battle with the Amalekites at Rephidim chronicled in Exodus 17:8. By other estimations, this is a dubious challenge to the traditional site when we recognize that the territories near St. Catherine’s monastery holds a very large alluvial plain extending out several miles beyond the mount and thus able to accommodate masses of people, encampments, and animals. The area accommodates tourist facilities and even hosts an airport once managed by Israel, now in the hands of Egypt. The traditional site encompasses the wadi and oasis Faran and indicates ancient water sources. However, the accommodations are clearly less spacious around the traditional site than at Jabal al-Lawz, where there is considerable room around the mount on the far side in what, in today’s climate, is a vast desert.

THE RED SEA

The Gulf of Aqaba is also called “The Red Sea.” We read in 1 Kings 9:26, “King Solomon also built a fleet of ships in Ezion-geber, which is near Eloth [Eilat], on the shore of the Red Sea in the land of Edom.” Notice that scripture states that the Red Sea is the Gulf of Aqaba. The Bitter Lakes region, or the shallow “Sea of Reeds,” is suggested as the traditional Red Sea crossing site. But it may be argued that the Bitter Lakes region is too marshy and shallow. We read in Isaiah 51:10, “Was it not Thou who dried up the sea, The waters of the great deep; Who made the depths of the sea a pathway for the redeemed to cross over?” Since the Bitter Lakes, or Sea of Reeds, does not constitute a “great deep,” the argument favors the Red Sea which indeed is a “great deep.” We have other scriptures to illustrate that the Israelites crossed in deep waters, for example, Exodus 15:5, “The deeps cover them; they went down to the depths like a stone.” The Gulf of Aqaba is also consistent with Exodus 13:18. “Hence God led the people around by the way of the wilderness to the Red Sea; and the sons of Israel went up in martial array from the land of Egypt.” That is to say, Israel went through the wilderness first before they came to the Red Sea.

At this point, a key question suggests itself. How long did Pharaoh grieve for his firstborn before pursuing the Israelites? Certainly it was more than just a few days but probably less than three weeks. Clearly he did not wait for the embalming of the prince, which would take forty days and constituted part of a mourning period of seventy days. To be consistent with Exodus 14:4-9, the Israelites had time to travel much further than the Bitter Lakes region. We do have a limit on the time to the Red Sea crossing based on Exodus 16:1. “Then they set out from Elim, and all the congregation of the sons of Israel came to the wilderness of Sin … on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departure from the land of Egypt.” Hence Elim, several days journey on the other side of the Red Sea crossing, was the stop thirty days after leaving Egypt.

If the Israelites crossed the Gulf of Aqaba, is there an underwater land bridge? There is indeed. In fact two such land bridges exist. The map above shows the proposed crossings at both of these sites and both of these have been the object of undersea investigations. The thought of an underwater land bridge was already suggested in Reprint 5641:1 long before this evidence emerged “… the whole nation by divine power was miraculously delivered by the Lord and led by a sand bar across the channel of the Red Sea.”

What is exciting are claims for the undersea discovery of a four-spoke chariot wheel; four-spoke gold chariot wheel, eight-spoke wheel and chariot cabs. All these claimed discoveries were found in the upper third of the Gulf of Aqaba in 1978. If proven, these underwater finds support the view that the Israelites crossed at the Nuweiba beach on the Gulf of Aqaba.

But before going further, a reflective pause is in order. The internet in our day has become what the bazaar was in past times, goods of every description and quality from the four corners of the earth are available and as always the only safe rule is “caveat emptor” or “buyer beware.” Hence, internet references are presented to the readers of Beauties of the Truth with trepidation, but in the hopes that they will leave the readers better informed about the debate going on regarding the route of the Exodus. With this word of warning, some internet sites with pictures of these finds from Nuweiba beach may be viewed by accessing the website references.^10,11

BOUNDARY MARKERS

Other evidence also suggests that Jabal al-Lawz, rather than the traditional Mt. Sinai, is consistent with the Biblical account. These include a plausible Saudi Arabian location for the “Bitter Springs of Marah,” the “Seventy Palms and Twelve Springs of Elim,” favored by the southernmost crossing at the Straits of Tiran. Additionally, within a modest journey from Jabal al-Lawz, Arab tradition identifies the “Caves of Moses.” These caves are mentioned in the Bible in 1 Kings 19:8, 13, “So he (Elijah) arose … and went … to Horeb the mountain of God … and stood in the entrance of the cave.” Elijah knew where Mt. Sinai was. There are caves on Mt. Musa in the land of Midian. Though topographical features that might be considered “caves” can be found also at the traditional Mt. Sinai, they are a more pronounced feature at Jabal al-Lawz.

Jabal al-Lawz has twelve stone piles that could be the “Boundary Markers” of Exodus 19:23. These markers are large boulders equidistantly placed around the mountain which could well mark the “no trespassing” zone of Exodus 18:12. Other remains are pointed to that would also be consistent with Exodus 24:4. “And [Moses] built an altar at the foot of the mountain with 12 pillars for the 12 tribes of Israel.”

PETROGLYPHS

There is evidence of the petroglyph of an Egyptian Bull that has been found carved in the sides of Jabal al-Lawz near a huge boulder-type altar. Possibly this is where Aaron built an altar before the golden calf of Exodus 32:5. Petroglyph images of bulls were not a part of the worship by native Midianites, but the bull was a very prevalent symbol of strength in Babylon and Egypt. As a counterargument, it must be noted that the petroglyphs are not exclusive to Jabal al-Lawz. They exist in abundance in the immediate region of Sinai as well as at the Egyptian outpost at Timna (north of the Gulf of Aqaba). Indeed, the far-ranging Egyptian influence throughout the Sinai during this period as evidenced by this outpost in Timna are considered strong arguments for why Moses would have to flee as far as Midian to escape Pharoah. Although the petroglyphs may possibly be evidence of Nabatean civilizations occupying the entire region, their presence at Jabal al-Lawz on cave walls has been presented as evidence that the mixed company of Egyptians who came with Israel to Midian created the drawings.

SPLIT ROCK

In order to qualify to be the true Mt. Sinai, we have to have a split rock and a water basin to contain the water as recorded in Exodus 17:6. “I will stand before you there on the rock at Horeb, and you shall strike the rock, and water will come out of it, that the people may drink.” A split rock at Mt. Musa, of immense dimensions, measuring 57 feet in height, leads to a gigantic basin. Hence, Mt. Musa is consistent with all the scriptural record on its geography. At the same time, this is not to say the same phenomenon of water flowing from a major rock crevice may not also have existed at the traditional Mt. Sinai site.

BLACKENED PEAK

Additionally, evidence is presented suggesting the peak of Mt. Musa has charred granite, not volcanic stone or ash, and further that this charring is of divine origin. Here however, the well-known geological phenomenon of “desert varnish” — an oxidizing of the outer layer of rock that darkens it — could easily be mistaken for charring by an untrained eye. Hence, this point has been challenged and at present should be considered a highly speculative argument.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Clearly the Mount of God is one of the most sacred and hallowed spots on earth. Why then the confusion and uncertainty regarding its location? Here, a site far into the hostile territory of present day Saudi Arabia could certainly explain the loss of memory as to the precise location. But wherever the exciting work on this issue may lead, our Savior’s words when asked about worship on another mountain are well to remember. “A time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this Mountain [of Samaria] nor in Jerusalem … God is a spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth” (John 4:21-24).

— Erwin Kalinski and Richard Doctor

 

---

(1) Williams, Larry R., The Mountain of Moses: The Discovery of Mount Sinai, Wynwood Press (1990).
(2) Blum, Howard, The Gold of Exodus, Pocket Books (1998).
(3) Cornuke, Robert and David Halbrook, In Search of the Mountain of God: The Discovery of the Real Mt. Sinai, Broadman & Holman Publishers (2000).
(4) Dawood, N.J., translator, The Koran, Sura: The table 5:21, Penguin Classics (1974), p.389.
(5) Pritchard, J.B., Atlas of the Bible, Harper Collins (1987) pp. 56-57
(6) Shanks, H., “Religion: On the Trail of the Real Mount Sinai,” Newsweek, February 23, 1998, p. 56.
(7) McEvedy, C., Atlas of Ancient History, Penguin (1979) p. 79
(8) Shanks, H., “Frank Moore Cross — An Interview,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 8/4: (1992) pp. 20-33, 61-63.
(9) Cross, F.M. to Gordon Franz, Private communication, May 21, 2001. The Gordon Franz criticism is found at: “Mt. Sinai is NOT at Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia,” Associates for Biblical Research, www.christiananswers.net/abr/sinai_not_arabia.html
(10) Support for crossing the Exodus crossing at the Gulf of Aqaba
a. “The Red Sea Crossing,” Voice of Truth, Inc., Tennessee, USA
www.arkdiscovery.com/red_sea_crossing.html
b. “The Red Sea Crossing Site,” Copyright 1998, Maranatha Church,
Inc., www.versebyverse.org/doctrine/redsea.html
c. “Wyatt Archaeological Research, Red Sea Crossing,” Ron Wyatt,
Covenant Keepers, www.exchangedlife.com/wyatt/redsea.html
(11) Several other references in support of Jabal al-Lawz may be found at:
www.bibleplus.org/discoveries/redsea.htm
www.bibleplus.org/discoveries/mtsinai.htm
www.baseinstitute.org/faqs/egyptcontrol.pdf

 

---

Download PDF