red sea hardcopy translated

Red Sea(dagat pula)

The first people known to explore the Red Sea were the Ancient Egyptians, who explored the area c. 2500 BC while looking for commercial routes southward. So how did theRed Seaget its name? Theories abound, but no one knows for sure.It could be from the red-hued "sea sawdust," a type of bacteriathat grows near the water's surface. Some historians believe the Red Sea is named fortheHimyarites, agroup who once lived along it's shores. Others believe that the "red" in Red Sea is actually a designator of the Sea's location relative to the ancient Mediterranean world - to the South. In ancient languages, the colors black, red, green, and white referred to North, South, East, and West, respectively.Wherever the name comes from, visitors to the Red Sea today can take advantage of fantastic snorkeling - more than 1200 species of fish havebeen found in the coral reef ecosystem of theRed Sea; more than 100 of these have not been located in any other body of water.If this sounds goodto you, join Smithsonian on ourAncient Civilizations of the Red Seaprogram for a chance to go snorkeling in Ras Mohammed National Park.(ang mga unang tao na nakatuklas sa dagat pula ay ang mga sinaunang ehipto, na nakatuklas ng area c. 2500 by habang naghahanap ng rutang komersyal pa timog. Paano nakuha ng dagat pula ang pangalan nito) May mga teoryang sumagana, pero walang nakakalaam ng kasiguraduhanIto ay maari sa kulay pulang abo na isang uri ng bakterya na lumalaki malapit sa dalapasigan o katubigan. May ilang mananalaysay ang naniniwala na ang dagat pula ay ipinangalan para sa himyarites, grupo ng mga taong nanirahan sa pampang nito. Ang iba naman ay naniniwala na ang pula sa dagat pula ay isang disenyo para sa lokasyon ng dagat sa sinaunang mundo ng mediterraneyan pa timog. Sa mga sinaunang lengwahe ang kulay itim, pula,lungtian at puti ay tumutukoy sa hilaga,timog,silangan,at kanluran.Higit sa 1200 species ng isda ang matatagpuan sa bahurang koral na nagganap sa dagat pula; lagpas 100 dito ay hindi matatagpuan sa ibang uri ng katubigan.

Dalawang golpo sa sa hilaga nito. Ang Golpo ng Suez at Golpo ng Aqaba

The passage of theRed Sea was ever, and indeed rightly, considered by the Hebrewsas a most important event in their nationalhistory, and also as one of the most wonderfulmiraclesof theAlmightyin behalf of His Chosen People.Ang pagdaan sa dagat pula ay kinonsidera ng mga hebreo na pinaka importanteng kaganapan sa kanilang kasaysayang nasyonal at ito rin ang isa sa pinaka mahiwaga himala ng makapangyarihan alang-alang sa piniling madla.TheScripturalreferences to the Gulf of Suez, on the north-east, are on the contrary both numerous and important, for it is themiraculouspassage of that arm of theRed Sea which is described inExodus 14,Ang mga nabanggit na nauukol sa bibliya sa golpo ng suez sa hilagang silangan ay salungat sa makakal at importante dahil sa mahimalang pagtawid sa kamay ng dagat pula sa paglalarawan sa exodus 14 celebrated inMoses'Canticle(Exodus 15), and repeatedly referred to in other parts ofHoly Writ, despite the recent theories framed to disprove thetraditionalidentification of the Gulf of Suez with theRed Seacrossed byIsrael, at the time of theExodus.Brugschand others have indeed argued that the water which was dried up to letIsraelpass was the northern end of the SirbonianBog, on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea, betweenEgyptand the southwest extremity ofChanaan, but this theory is untenable because contrary not only to the statements of theBiblicalnarratives but also to the recent discoveries which have settled the position of Gessen, whence theIsraelitesset out for Palestine. Again,Bekeand others have advanced the view that the eastern arm of theRed Sea, i.e. the Gulf of Akabah, and not the Gulf of Suez, is that which the Hebrewscrossed. But this view also is inconsistent with the mostnatural interpretation of theBiblicaldata concerning theExodus. Thetraditional identification of the Gulf of Suez with theRed SeacrossedbyIsraelshould therefore not be given up.It remainstrue, however, that the scholars who most readily admit this identification are still divided with regard to the actual place of crossing. Their disagreement is chiefly due to the difficulty of ascertaining the exact extent of this western arm of theRed Sea at the time of theExodus.Nananatiling totoo pero ang mga skolar ay handing tanggapin ang pagkakalilanlan pero hati dahil sa tunay na lugar ng pagtawid.ang hindi pagsang ayon ay nangungulong dahil sa hirap tiyakin ang eksaktong laki ng kanlurang kamay ng dagat pula sa oras ng exodus