From Newsgroup: uk.religion.christian

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-15101333/ancient-papyrus-confirms-Bible.html

I'm pleased to see the Ipuwer Papyrus getting a bit of publicity. I went
to see it in the Rejksmuseum (spelling?) in Leyden some years ago, specifically because of its similarity to the account of the plagues associated with the Exodus.

"Nay but the river is turned to blood. Can a man drink from it? He turns
from it with loathing."

Some have attempted to explain this as some natural phenomenon, but if
it were natural, one would expect it to recur. So far as I know, this is
the only reference to the river turning to blood in the whole of
Egyptian history, so whether the river was actual blood or merely an extraordinary growth of algae or something washed down from the
Ethiopian highlands, it was a unique event and the desription in Ipuwer exactly parallels the description in Exodus.

Unfortunately the dating of the papyrus is not as clear-cut as the
newspaper report claims. The actual piece of papyrus appears to come
from the Nineteenth Dynasty period, but the language used can be dated
back to as far as the Twelfth Dynasty. However a dating on such a basis
is always controversial, as authors have been known to adopt archaic
styles for dramatic effect.

Nevertheless, my personal opinion is that the papyrus is a genuine
reference to the Exodus. The Revised Chronology I accept places the
Exodus in the Thirteenth Dynasty and the asiatics who arrive in Egypt
(see the Wikipedia article) are the invading Hyksos, who took advantage
of the economic turmoil and the loss of Egypt's army and king in the Red
Sea, to take over the land "without a battle", as Manetho claims.

God bless,
Kendall K. Down
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.religion.christian

On 16/09/2025 03:59, Kendall K. Down wrote:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-15101333/ancient- papyrus-confirms-Bible.html

I'm pleased to see the Ipuwer Papyrus getting a bit of publicity. I went
to see it in the Rejksmuseum (spelling?) in Leyden some years ago, specifically because of its similarity to the account of the plagues associated with the Exodus.

"Nay but the river is turned to blood. Can a man drink from it? He turns from it with loathing."

Some have attempted to explain this as some natural phenomenon, but if
it were natural, one would expect it to recur. So far as I know, this is
the only reference to the river turning to blood in the whole of
Egyptian history, so whether the river was actual blood or merely an extraordinary growth of algae or something washed down from the
Ethiopian highlands, it was a unique event and the desription in Ipuwer exactly parallels the description in Exodus.

I am pretty sure the Nile does change colour (due to algae) occasionally.

This is the first reference I found:

https://www.yourweather.co.uk/news/trending/is-it-a-hoax-river-nile-turns-red-like-in-biblical-legends-egypt.html

Unfortunately the dating of the papyrus is not as clear-cut as the
newspaper report claims. The actual piece of papyrus appears to come
from the Nineteenth Dynasty period, but the language used can be dated
back to as far as the Twelfth Dynasty. However a dating on such a basis
is always controversial, as authors have been known to adopt archaic
styles for dramatic effect.

Nevertheless, my personal opinion is that the papyrus is a genuine
reference to the Exodus. The Revised Chronology I accept places the
Exodus in the Thirteenth Dynasty and the asiatics who arrive in Egypt
(see the Wikipedia article) are the invading Hyksos, who took advantage
of the economic turmoil and the loss of Egypt's army and king in the Red Sea, to take over the land "without a battle", as Manetho claims.

God bless,
Kendall K. Down

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.religion.christian

On 17/09/2025 21:53, GB wrote:

I am pretty sure the Nile does change colour (due to algae) occasionally. This is the first reference I found:

https://www.yourweather.co.uk/news/trending/is-it-a-hoax-river-nile- turns-red-like-in-biblical-legends-egypt.html

Thanks. My immediate thought on seeing the first picture was "That's not
the Nile!" and, in fact, at the end of the article it admits that the
pictures are of a lake and stream in Chile, South America.

Although the article claims "Numerous media outlets and profiles on
social networks have reported that the river has appeared dyed red", it
does not cite these reports and I have not come across them.

In addition the article comments, "in reality the Nile can be dyed a
wide variety of colours in addition to red, such as brown, green or even purple". It is certainly true that the Nile can have different colours depending on what is washed down during the rainy season - it's not for nothing that the tributary which comes from Ethiopia is known as the
Blue Nile and that from Lake Victoria as the White Nile. (See https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/95560823320457238/)

Actually, in that picture the stream on the left, which comes from
Ethiopia, is probably the "purple" referred to above and the stream on
the right seems more woryth of the name "Blue Nile"!

1. The colours are rather muddy and would hardly merit the description "blood".
2. The colours do not in fact stop people drinking the water.

Have there been algal blooms in the Nile? I won't say that it is
impossible, but naturally occuring blooms (as opposed to those caused by
the run-off of human fertilisers) in freshwater systems appear
restricted to lakes. For the entire length of the Egyptian Nile to be
affected by an algal bloom of such intensity that people could not drink
the water and it appeared like blood, is so improbable that it would
require a miracle for it to happen. Which, of course, is what Exodus claims.

God bless,
Kendall K. Down
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2