God rescued his people and closed the door to any possible return to Egypt. In tangible ways, the Lord fought for his people as he promised.

The crossing of the Red Sea is one of the most memorable and cinematic events recorded in the Bible. This brief section of history has been captured in several films as well as in thousands of Sunday school lessons and coloring pages.
So if we were asked to recount this story, we could probably list many of the highlights without consulting Scripture. However, because the episode is so famous, and depictions of the event are so numerous, we will inevitably miss some details. The story is perhaps too familiar.
This was certainly the case for me! I recently reread this portion of Exodus and felt like I was reading this passage for the first time.
Four Important Details
Peter has written extensively and deeply on all of Exodus and on this passage specifically. To learn how this event fits into the whole book of Exodus, and for a razor-sharp look at this particular episode, I encourage you to read his article.
Here I will highlight some aspects of Exodus 13–14 that I had not remembered. These details are not just interesting—they help guide us to the main point of the passage. (Remember: good observation fuels accurate interpretation!)
Israel Crossed at Night
For understandable reasons, all pictures and video depicting this event happen during the day. (That makes for a much better coloring page!) But this event happened in the dark of night. (See Exodus 14:24 and Exodus 14:27 where it seems that the Israelites crossed during the night, with their path illuminated by the pillar of fire, and then the Egyptians started their pursuit at first light of the morning.) As we will see below, God aimed to confuse the Egyptians, and the nighttime setting was an important ingredient.
The Wind Blew All Night to Part the Sea
Yes, Moses “stretched out his hand” in order to divide the sea, but the way this happened was that “the Lord drove the sea back by a strong east wind all night and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided” (Exodus 14:21). This miracle did not happen in an instant but rather over the course of several hours. Imagine waiting by the side of the Sea while this was happening!
Read More
Related Posts:

Third, this is a persistent issue. There have been efforts to address this issue such as the recently affirmed human sexuality report. We do have our helpful standards in the Westminster Confession of Faith. Some contend this is adequate and no more needs to be said, especially the proposed amendments. But help me if I am missing something (I am the new guy) but apparently these resources are not sufficient for the very fact that the issue persists.

Through the years I always sought the impressions of new guests to my church. Not that the opinion of a longtime member was insignificant, but it was the fresh eyes of new people who saw things others somehow didn’t notice or always appreciate. So as a newcomer to the PCA I thought my impressions might be of value to some as we enter the home stretch of voting on overtures 23 and 37. Now I should point out I am not a newcomer to pastoral ministry. I am a seasoned (that’s code for old guy) pastor from several denominational backgrounds.
So the first thing that strikes me is this, a real issue has presented itself. That may seem too obvious to bother mentioning, but the point is these overtures are not hypothetical or arbitrary. Rather, they are responding to real life circumstances. Real people are really advocating for a position that involves embracing one’s ongoing identity as gay and a potential officer of the church.
The framers and defenders of the proposed overtures did not go on a hunt into people’s private lives to find these issues. I am sure they would much rather focus on other pressing matters of life and ministry. It is not unkind or uncharitable, therefore, to support these overtures that seek to provide clarity in response to this real-life issue.
Second, this is a complicated issue. The concern that the wording of the proposed overtures is complicated and introduces new language to the standards of the church should not be alarming. The presenting issue is complicated. And again, this issue was not chosen by the framers or defenders of the overtures. It was chosen by these who are supporting such a novel and complicated position.
If a secular court has to deal with a malpractice suit involving brain surgery, they cannot complain that it is complicated. Brain surgery is complicated. Likewise, human identity and sexuality are complicated. If the church courts are forced to struggle with handling complicated and novel issues like human identity there is no one to thank but those suggesting the position in which we find ourselves. Therefore, no one should vote against the proposed overtures simply on the grounds that they are complicated or deal with new vocabulary.
Third, this is a persistent issue. There have been efforts to address this issue such as the recently affirmed human sexuality report. We do have our helpful standards in the Westminster Confession of Faith. Some contend this is adequate and no more needs to be said, especially the proposed amendments. But help me if I am missing something (I am the new guy) but apparently these resources are not sufficient for the very fact that the issue persists.
It would be unnecessary to add specific cases to our constitution if it was sufficient to handle the real issue before us. But obviously something more is needed. And there are times when the constitution needs to be amended to make plain the will of the body. Therefore, no one should vote against the proposed overtures on the grounds that they are unnecessary.
And finally, it is an urgent issue. In a recent men’s Bible study at our young church plant the issue of the overtures and the position of “side B Christianity” came up. (Trust me, I was not the one who mentioned it.) Men were immediately alarmed and confused. They wanted to know how long this had been going on. I mentioned a couple years. What is being done? they wanted to know. I tried to explain the difference between the court cases and the proposed overtures. I tried to explain how the system of Presbyterian government works (or is supposed to work).
From the looks and comments that night, I am not sure our church plant will survive if these overtures are not passed, or some definitive action is taken to make clear it is not okay to be an officer of the church and embrace the identity of a gay Christian. But we’re a small bunch and this is not a threat. The point is I have been down this road before. As the pastor of a large church in the PCUSA, I saw the same look in people’s eyes. I heard the same questions and frustrations. I found myself saying the same hollow words- “It’s not exactly what it sounds like.” “We can make a difference.” “This doesn’t reflect who we are as a church.” You know how well that turned out.
Coming into the PCA I was aware there was a diversity of views and even movements within the denomination. But I also saw a denomination that had exciting prospects to fulfill an essential mission. I also strongly believed (and still do) that the vast majority of people within the denomination would not support the position of an officer of the church embracing an ongoing identity as a gay Christian. And while I have learned that people can appreciate debate and due process, they won’t endure protracted procedures that yield mixed messages, or when a system cannot accomplish what is the apparent intent of the constitution and the will of the body.
I have learned that people leave churches like churches leave denominations. Some in groups, some as individuals. Some leave in a huff, some quietly, still others may stay but don’t engage. We should be very concerned about the moment in which we find ourselves.
It is time to address this. If you feel it is appropriate at this moment in our denomination to allow for officers of the church to embrace the identity of a gay Christian, then vote against the overtures. Let me simply ask that you begin your comments whether in formal debates, in social media, or in any other venue with the fact that you do feel this is a viable position and you embrace it. And let me ask that you are forthcoming with your congregation and let them know your position as well. Don’t be like the many pastors and elders I have seen through the years who mislead their flock as to their views and positions.
If you feel this is not the right position for our denomination to be known for (and I can tell you from experience we will be known for it) or the position that allows us to fulfill our mission, but you still have some reservations about the specific overtures, please reflect on the fact that this is indeed an urgent and persistent issue that though by nature complicated, needs to be addressed. Even if you feel the proposed overtures are less than perfect, that is not a reason to vote against them.
It is not the lack of clarity of an overture or the uncertainty of its imagined outcome that we should be most concerned about, but the emerging lack of clarity about who are as a denomination and the uncertainty we will have in fulfilling our mission if these overtures do not pass that should most concern us.
Alan Hager is a member of New River Presbytery and the Organizing Pastor of Grace Church in Buckhannon, WV.

I sometimes wonder if such experiences didn’t play a major role in my seeking something or someone in life that accepted me warts and all, loved me, and gave purpose to my individual life.  I’m here to say I believe such experiences prodded me to find such a one, such a person.  I met that person not for the first time—as I was already acquainted with him—but when I was 19 years old and received him into my life, heart, and spirit.  That Person was Jesus Christ who became my Lord and Savior.

A question recently posted on Facebook asked if you remember your most humiliating experience as a child.  It took me by surprise how fast two experiences came to mind.  Both took place in elementary school coming at the hands of adults—a teacher and principal.  Memories came to the fore; pain was felt immediately.  Those experiences weren’t forgotten but rather had scarred me and followed me through life.  They accounted for some of my most prominent and constant insecurities.
The first took place in third grade.  Coming from a poor family situation, I did not receive allowance money as other children received.  I did not have the freedom to buy candy or gum.  One day, a student who was friendly with me offered me a stick of gum.  I took it and unwrapped, it sticking it in my mouth.  The teacher espied me chewing gum and came to me, made me stand up, she walked me to the front of the class and made me stand there for what seemed an interminable amount of time with the gum on my nose.  I was humiliated.  When the class ended, I went to the restroom to remove the gum that had hardened on my nose.
The second experience occurred in sixth grade.  We were in the auditorium. Some boys grabbed the stage velvet curtains and leaped off the stage to the floor crying out like Tarzan’s hoarse bark, flying through the air on a jungle vine.  As a tomboy, I felt I could do whatever they were capable of doing.  I grabbed the curtain, cried out like Tarzan and leaped to the floor.  The principal came and caught us.  She scolded us and went on to say to me in front of all the students, “. . . but you, a girl!  I can’t believe you did it too.”  The curtain had torn. We were all told our parents would have to pay for the repair.  I cringed that I would have to report this to my parents who struggled financially.  I went to my class, sat in the back of the room and silently cried in humiliation.  I was eleven years old
Such experiences as a child lastingly impacted that child—in fact, any child.  The first experience is recognizable today as abusive action by a teacher against a child who normally never had gum or candy at school.  To stand in front of the class with gum on one’s nose until the end of class was abusive humiliation.  I later recognized how deeply it scarred me causing almost a self-hatred and sense of rejection.
The second experience represented a childish prank of a child doing something foolish to prove herself.  The principal’s rebuke was valid, but the action of singling out one child due to her gender put her in a more vulnerable position.  Later as I stood waiting on a corner to cross the street, my brother in an upper grade came behind me and said: “I heard what you did.  Boy!  Are you ever going to get it when you get home”!  I trembled crossing the street fearing what was in store for me.  My mother scolded me and said, “Wait until your father comes home.”  I did not receive a spanking but rather a strong rebuke and “How could you do that?”  Both parents discouraged my tomboy ways, as they wanted their daughter to be all-girl. We waited with dread for how much the bill would be to repair the curtain.  When it came, my parents paid it immediately.  Since I didn’t receive an allowance, I couldn’t pay them back.
Why am I sharing this story?  It’s because children are very fragile emotionally and mentally.  Discipline can cross a line that goes beyond correction to permanently scarring them.  Back then, educators probably didn’t study child psychology.  Some children who experience abuse become abusers.  Others become dysfunctional.  All experience brokenness to some extent.  Those scars remain hidden or latent, but they do remain; and to think more than seventy years later they still cause pain reveals how powerful they are in a child’s life.
A second reason for sharing this story is a reminder to me and, I hope to others, to never forget children are fragile and vulnerable.  Discipline with love, sensitivity, and limits.  It’s not just actions that matter, but words also matter.
Lastly—but not least—remember and give thanks to God who can enable us to be healed even if scars remain and to forgive those who either abused or humiliated us at any time in life, not just as children.
I sometimes wonder if such experiences didn’t play a major role in my seeking something or someone in life that accepted me warts and all, loved me, and gave purpose to my individual life.  I’m here to say I believe such experiences prodded me to find such a one, such a person.  I met that person not for the first time—as I was already acquainted with him—but when I was 19 years old and received him into my life, heart, and spirit.  That Person was Jesus Christ who became my Lord and Savior, who brought pardon and redemption, who brought real purpose and even confidence to my life, and has steadfastly been faithful to me despite moments of unfaithfulness to Him.  I didn’t seek Him; He sought me.  As the African American Spiritual articulately reveals, “He never failed me yet.”   I am nothing more than a debtor to God’s grace through Jesus Christ.
Helen Louise Herndon is a member of Central Presbyterian Church (EPC) in St. Louis, Missouri. She is freelance writer and served as a missionary to the Arab/Muslim world in France and North Africa.