Quran 10:92-94 Is not a clear prophecy; in fact it is not a prophecy.

A study of the Muslim apologetic claim that the Pharaoh's body discovery is fulfillment of Surah 10:90-92 indicates that the claim is flawd. The following issues are found:

1. The alleged prophecy is not absolutely clear: The mummy was not found on the Red Sea Shores and there is still division among scholars about identifying who the Exodus' Pharaoh was.

2. The salt crystals in the mummy does not indicate the Pharaoh died from drowning.

3. The contents of Surah 10:90-92 does not document previously hidden knowledge. Furthermore, Surah 10:90-92 is not the earliest historical writing claiming that the Pharaoh of Exodus drowned and later on was recovered.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was sharing the other day with my muslim friend several passages within the Torah referring  the person of Jesus. My Muslim friend argued that the prophecies that I was referring to were not very clear, and could correspond of a conspiracy. According to him anyone could interpret any passage and make it look like it was fulfilled in Jesus' earthly life.

Conversely, he argued that in the Koran there exist clear prophecies that ahave been fulfilled to the letter. He made reference to Surah 10:90-92:

90 And We took the Children of Israel across the sea, and Pharaoh and his soldiers pursued them in tyranny and enmity until, when drowning overtook him, he said, "I believe that there is no deity except that in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am of the Muslims." 91 Now? And you had disobeyed [Him] before and were of the corrupters? 92 So today We will save you in body that you may be to those who succeed you a sign. And indeed, many among the people, of Our signs, are heedless (1)

Then my Muslim friend used the following banner:

He then argued: "It says that pharaoh would be preserved as a sign for the whole world, And he is being shown to the whole world in museums around the world, And he is being shown to the whole world in museums around the world as a sign"

I should confess that this is the first time that I have a discussion about this Muslim apologetic argument. However, one thing that called my attention right away was the following note about the so claimed mummy of the Exodus' Pharaoh

"(...) it was found by the Red Sea and now is on display in the Royal Mummies Museum of Cairo"

A quick look at wikipedia (2) indicates that the mummy of Ramses II was found in Deir El Bahri, near the town of Luxor, in the valley of the Kings. Since I lived in Egypt for 3 years, it called my attention. The Valley of the kings shortest distance to the Red Sea is approximately 220 Km, and 400 to 500 Km away from the closest possible crossing point between Sinai peninsula and the Egyptian Eastern desert. This fact lead me to look into this argument in more detail. The following are the conclusions I've drawn:

• The Muslim apologetic banner exhagerates claiming that the body was found by The Red Sea. The mummy was found in a tomb at least 400 Km away from where the Red Sea crossing could likely have occured.
• The verses are not a clear prophecy, since there exist division on who the Pharaoh was.
• The most renowned Egyptiologists refute those arguments stating that the examinations in the mummy indicates the body was rescued from the sea.
• There are writings predating the Qur'an (in what Rabbinical Jews call "oral Torah", the Talmud and Midrash) which argued the body of Pharaoh drowned and was rescued. The author of the Qur'an could have drawn from these sources when composing Surah 10:90-92.
• Mummification was investigated and documented by greeks and others several centuries before the writing of the Qur'an. Hence it was not secret knowledge that the bodies of Pharaoh's were preserved.

Let me expand shortly on each of these conclusions.

1. The alleged prophecy is not absolutely clear: The mummy was not found on the Red Sea Shores and there is still division among scholars about identifying who the Exodus' Pharaoh was.

I have explained above that the Muslim apologetic banner is not accurate stating the mummy was found by the red Sea. But let's not make this a straw man argument. Scholars have argued for years who could be the Pharaoh. In order to identify who this Pharaoh was, scholars have looked into the reference found in 1 Kings 6:1, which would place the Exodus around 1446 BCE. Other scholars have argued for a date around 1200 BCE. This is a 246 year span which includes 11 Pharaoh's from the 18th dynasty and 4 Pharaoh's in the 19th dinasty.

Even among muslim apologists there exist division about who was the Pharaoh referred to in Surah 10:90-92. As we find from the argument above, some strongly suggest that the recovered  body is the mummy of Ramses II. Other's renowned apologists, such as Maurice Bucaille claimed that the Pharaoh who drowned and was preserved was Merneptah, the successor of Ramses II(3).

2. The salt crystals in the mummy does not indicate the Pharaoh died from drowning

It has been argued that the presence of salts in the mummy of Pharaoh is clear indication that the death body had been drowned shortly on the sea. This is actually one of the arguments that Maurice Bucaille used to support his idea that Merneptah died while he drowned. Also, other muslmim apologists use the same argument, but to support Ramses II candidacy.

Former Egyptian Culture Minister, Farouk Hosni, pronounced the following statements in 2007:

Referring to the rumour that Ramses II was the pharaoh of the biblical Exodus, Hosni described it as "far fetched". He said that when he was the Egyptian cultural attaché in Paris in 1976 he had attended an exhibition about Ramses II in the Grand Palais entitled "Ramses II, Pharaoh of the Exodus". Such a title, he continued, had triggered the anger of French scientists and Egyptologists, especially the scientist Morris Bokay who carried out the analyses of Ramses II's mummy. Hosni told reporters that Bokay had told him Ramses II could not have been the Pharaoh of the Exodus of Moses for two reasons: first he died of a severe toothache, as he was suffering from an infected tumour in one of his teeth. Second, Ramses II was a 90-year- old king with a bent back, which would have prevented him from chasing after Moses and his followers.

In 2009, the renowned egyptian egyptiologist, Zani Hawass wrote an article titled "The Mummy of Pharaoh of Moses" for the weekly newspaper Al-Ahram. In this article, Hawass indicated:

Numerous false ideas about the mummy have recently been published. First, it has been said that the hands of the mummy are positioned differently than all other royal mummies, especially the left hand. This is inaccurate. Both Ramses II's arms are laid on his chest, just like all the other royal New Kingdom mummies. It has also been said that when the linen surrounding the mummy was untied the left arm jumped up, leading to the conclusion that the embalmers forced the mummy's arms position. Finally, some have stated that the laboratory results demonstrated the remains of salt inside the body of Ramses II, and that X-rays showed that many of his bones were broken. According to theorists, these results indicate that the Pharaoh drowned in the sea. They claimed that the strange position of his left hand indicated that he was holding the reins of a horse, while swinging a sword in his right. Furthermore, they added that while the Pharaoh was drowning he was attempting to push the water with his left hand, hence the reason for the embalmers having to force the left arm back into the traditional position.
I do not think that any of these ideas is correct. Egyptologists know that salt was used in the mummification process and that a great amount of salt is always found while examining mummies. For example, about 28 large jars full of natron, the type of salt used in mummification, were recently discovered in tomb KV 63 in the Valley of the Kings. Therefore, the fact that salt was found inside the royal mummy of Ramses II does not, by any means, prove that he drowned in the Red Sea. This said, I do not believe that there is any real evidence demonstrating that Pharaoh Ramses II drowned at all.
All these theories posted on the Internet are inaccurate, as the research conducted was not scientific.

3. The contents of Surah 10:90-92 does not document previously hidden knowledge. Furthermore, Surah 10:90-92 is not the earliest historical writing claiming that the Pharaoh of Exodus drowned and later on was recovered.

One of the apologetic arguments towards supporting Surah 10:90-92 prophetic nature, is claiming that at the time of the prophet of Islam it was not known about mummification. This is claimed by the fact that modern mummy discoveries were made only after the 19th century. This argument fails to recognize the fact that mummification in the egyptian culture was documented in the ancient world. For example, Herodotus, Strabo, Diodorus Siculus, Manetho, an Egyptian priest, documented the techniques of Mummification, during the reign of Ptolemy I and Ptolemy II (5). This leads to conclude that there was knowledge of Egyptian mummification before the time of the hijrah, among the cultures surrounding the Arabs during the time of Muhammad.

Last, and perhaps one of the most important arguments, is that Surah 10:90-92 is not the oldeest historical writing documenting that Pharaoh drowned, and his body was saved from the waters. The book of Exodus is not explicit about what happened to Pharaoh, though it is clear to document what occur to his army, his charriors and horses. Exodus 14:5-10 documents that Pharaoh and his army went after the Israelites. However, Exodus 14:23 does not clearly mention whether Pharaoh himself went into the parted Red Sea during the chase. This has enabled multiple interpretations from Rabbinical Jews through history. Multiple reputable Rabbis have documented their views, many even from before the time of Muhammad. The site Chabad.org (6), documents the following:

There are differing opinions in the Midrash (Mechilta Beshalach 2:6) concerning his fate. Some say that he drowned in the Red Sea together with his army, while others opine that he survived the miraculous event. He survived in order to retell a firsthand account of the miracles and wonders that G‑d performed.

Looking for what the Mechilta Beshalach said, in wikipedia is found an article dedicated to this Midrashic commentary. In there the following references are shown:

• Reading the words, “there remained not so much as one of them,” in Exodus 14:28, Rabbi Judah taught that not even Pharaoh himself survived, as Exodus 15:4 says, “Pharaoh's chariots and his host has He cast into the sea.” Rabbi Nehemiah, however, said that Pharaoh alone survived, teaching that Exodus 9:16 speaks of Pharaoh when it says, “But in very deed for this cause have I made you to stand.” And some taught that later on Pharaoh went down and was drowned, as Exodus 15:19 says, “For the horses of Pharaoh went in with his chariots and with his horsemen into the sea.” (8) Note: Rabbi Nehemiah lived circa 150 CE.
• The Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael cited four reasons for why “Israel saw the Egyptians dead upon the sea-shore,” as reported in Exodus 14:30: (1) so that the Israelites should not imagine that the Egyptians escaped the sea on the other side, (2) so that the Egyptians should not imagine that the Israelites were lost in the sea as the Egyptians had been, (3) so that the Israelites might take the Egyptians’ spoils of silver, gold, precious stones, and pearls, and (4) so that the Israelites might recognize the Egyptians and reprove them.[9] Note that this commentary highlights that more than one egyptian dead body was seen on the sea shores.
• The Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer taught that when in Exodus 15:11 the Israelites sang, “Who is like You among the divine creatures, O Lord?” Pharaoh replied after them, saying the concluding words of Exodus 15:11, “Who is like You, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders?” Rabbi Nechunia, son of Hakkanah, thus cited Pharaoh as an example of the power of repentance. Pharaoh rebelled most grievously against God, saying, as reported in Exodus 5:2, “Who is the Lord, that I should hearken to His voice?” But then Pharaoh repented using the same terms of speech with which he sinned, saying the words of Exodus 15:11, “Who is like You, O Lord, among the mighty?” God thus delivered Pharaoh from the dead. Rabbi Nechunia deduced that Pharaoh had died from Exodus 9:15, in which God told Moses to tell Pharaoh, “For now I had put forth my hand, and smitten you.”(10) Note: This portion states the same that surah 10:92 says "So today We will save you in body that you may be to those who succeed you a sign"

Note that the composition of the Pirke of Rabbi Eliezer started between 80 - 110 CE, that's approximately 5 centurties before the advent of the prophet of Islam.

-------------------------------
Foot notes:

(1) Surah 10:90-92 Sahih International Translation
(2) Wikipedia entry about Ramses II  - https://t.co/7JX2XJxh4E
(3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLINW1pldvs see video between 47:52 and 51:20
(4) http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2007/840/eg2.htm
(5)Religio medici. Pseudodoxia epidemica, books 1-4
(6) http://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/666853/jewish/Did-Pharaoh-die-in-the-Red-Sea.htm
(7) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirke_De-Rabbi_Eliezer
(8) Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael Beshalah 7:8. Reprinted in, e.g., Mekhilta According to Rabbi Ishmael. Translated by Jacob Neusner. And Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael. Translated by Jacob Z. Lauterbach.
(9) Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael Beshalah 7:18. Reprinted in, e.g., Mekhilta According to Rabbi Ishmael. Translated by Jacob Neusner. And Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael. Translated by Jacob Z. Lauterbach.
(10) Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer, chapters 42–43. Reprinted in, e.g., Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer. Translated and annotated by Gerald Friedlander, pages 334, 341–42.