The Red Sea is parting again, but this time Moses doesn’t have a hand in it.

I told you a couple of times that genetics has shown that the Jewish priests all had a common ancinet father about 3360 years ago, about the same time as Exodus claims Aaron's sons would be priests FOREVER.

Then I told you that archeologists discovered a Pharaoh who lived 3360 years ago, converting to mnotheism.
This is the first appearance of monotheism and it was covered up histroically until these archeologists discovered the facts.

Tge genetics and monotheism together confirm Exodus and Moses and Aaron.

 

They were the mysterious Hyksos people.
Joseph was the person who brought them into Egypt just as he advised the pharaoh of that time to trade grain they had stored for land and farms during a seven year famine.
The after math left the Jewish family rich and powerful.
With no real competition, and with all the farm land their own, they ruled for 200 years until a Pharaoh rose up and overpowered them
That started aroind 1700BC.

By 1500BC, the Jews were slaves for 2 centuries, until Moses freed them.

 

Yeah,...
In 600AD, christians were rushing into Arabia saving people and building churches.
Muhammed listened to what they said.

He saw they had trouble explaining what they called Trinity, and their belief that Christ was God (Rev 3:12).
What Muhammed did was side with the Jews, while pretending to accept Jesus as a great prophet, one they would never abide by.
They would not love thy enemy.
They would not do the Eucharist.
They would not believe men could become the sons of God.
Etc.

Had the Christian told the Arabs that Christ was Truth, as personification and image of his father, Reality, then they would have ignored Muhammed.
But these christians did not say this, and the Arab leaders saw Islam as a way to avoid the conversion Rome had experienced.

Never the less, even now, a Muslims say Allah is Truth, they ignore Truth does have a father called Reality.

 

No the Hyksos weren't Hebrews.. They rode horses and had chariots and sophisticated archery... and there is NO genetic confirmation of the Exodus myth.

 

No the Christians didn't rush into Arabia.. LOLOL..

There were two enclaves of Nestorians in Najran and on Taurut island a hundred years before Muhammed.. The Romans had NO presence on the Arabian Peninsula.

 

The Hebrews strove to make themselves and their religion appear superior to the Egyptians and their pagan religion. Acknowledgement of the capability to design and build the pyramids would have been too much of a concession. Worse yet, the pyramids were built without the help and participation of the Hebrew's God.

 

That's right...

Our poster claims the Hyksos were Jews... but they were expelled from Egypt in 1550 BC. They were known for horse burials, worshipping a storm god later associated with Seth and they had composite bows.. Most scholars think they were Hurrians mixed with Amorites.

 

The Hyksos increased their numbers over a few generations and used te same weapons and chariots as their comrade Egypts.
Under Joseph, the Jews who were his brothers used the great famine described .n Genesis to gain power and control over that Nation. Initially, without the resource to arms, they used money, food, property. But their small numbers increased and Egypt chariots and weapons were added, too.
They had used position inside the government, based upon Joseph's great powers under that first Pharoh, and over time came to control that whole country for 200 years.
The reason no one knows who they were is that it was these Jews who came during the start of the famine, and they increased in population inside the country.

The genertic evidence for the Jewish priesthood is now very well documented and certain too.

 

What do you mean "that first Pharoah"?

The Hyksos were not Jews and Jews didn't have horses.. Solomon had very few horses that he supposedly acquired from Egypt, but very few.. and King Omri had a small stable..

Nomads walked to the Nile Delta every time there was famine and drought. You might want to read Manetto.. He wrote about the expulsion of the Lepers.

 

?
All Egypt was christian.
Egypt was 100% Christian in the second century, and it was that way until the muslims forced them to either be silent and live, and pay a tax, or die.

As to a Hyksos “conquest”, some archaeologists depict the Hyksos as a reference to a ‘creeping conquest’, that is, a gradual infiltration of migrating nomads or seminomads who either slowly took over control of the country piecemeal or by a swift coup d’etat put themselves at the head of the existing government.
In The World of the Past (1963, p. 444), archeologist Jacquetta Hawkes stated: “It is no longer thought that the Hyksos rulers... represent the invasion of a conquering horde of Asiatics... they were wandering groups of Semites who had long come to Egypt for trade and other peaceful purposes.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyksos

 

You think that because they were probably Semites they had to be Jews??? But Jews didn't have horses, composite bows or chariots.

 

Those are all guesses and the best guess is that these were a slow migration of Jews through Jacob who came into the land and grew in numbers.

 

Of course tthe Jews did not intually have these things, because at first, they were just the 12 sons of Isaac who had come there.
It was over time these things were "invented" or duplicated.

You are just trying to avoid this because you made the Jews your enemy, and you hate to see the Bible being verified in this way.

 

Well, the Hyksos were a Semitic people, and to be honest the "Jews" as we would later know them had not really evolved yet.

Actually, it was not. There were a lot of Jews still in Egypt, as were the old gods. The cults of Isis and Osiris thrived in Egypt until the 6th century CE.

And the most dominant form of "Christianity" in Egypt at that time you would not even recognize. It was Gnosticism. No "trinity", they did not even accept the "Divinity of Christ". At the time of the Second Century, most "Christians" were simply another sect of Jews, as was the other large messianic movement at the time, they are what is generally called "Sabians" or "Mandaeism" (where John the Baptist is their prophet, and Jesus was a lesser prophet). At the time of the 2nd and 3rd centuries CE, the "Cult of John the Baptist" was actually the majority Jewish Messianic Sect during the Ante-Nicene Period (late 1st through early 4th century CE).

Actually, they did use chariots. There are even references to Jews using them in 2 Kings. But the ancient Jews never really used bows in warfare, nor did they use chariots. They were known however as having among the finest infantry and slingers in the region. Many kingdoms would hire their forces as mercenaries.

It was not that they did not know of these weapons, they simply did not use them. Culturally, they were infantry and slingers. Much like the medieval Swiss were crossbowmen, and the English were longbowmen. A lot of times prior to more modern forms of warfare nations tended to use weapons they were most identified with culturally. Romans knew about all of the weapons in use, but the gladius and pila were the ones they used because that was their culture. If they wanted archers or slingers (or decent cavalry), they tended to hire mercenary auxiliaries.

And the Romans were known for their horses. But they never were able to really train and raise decent cavalry, so they rarely used them other then scouting and screening and logistically (wagons). And they knew of chariots, but pretty much used them only for ceremonial purposes.

But the "Jewish People" at the time of the Exodus stories the "Jews" really had not evolved. They were still scattered among various Semitic groups of people who mostly migrated through the region from Lower Egypt to Turkey and Iran. However, I am one of those that believes that the origin of the Exodus story did come from the Hyksos. But had changed quite a bit in the 1,000 years or so that it was oral history before being written down in around 500 BCE.

 

Actually everyone in Palestine and the Levant headed for the Nile Delta in times of famine and drought... particularly the unaffiliated shepherds.. Think Habiru here. .. and there is little to no evidence of horses in Palestine.. Too rocky and not enough pasture...

The officers in the Roman legions did ride horseback.

If you recall.. the Scythian invaders came "silently like locusts" and they were apparently deadly because they rode horseback and carried composite bows.

 

Good post.. From what I have read Roman horses were large and heavy as were Roman chariots.

The Hyksos seem to have use faster smaller horse (like the Arabian) and their chariots were lighter and faster.. Not to say that the operated in the same time frame.

 

Well, by the time the Republic of Rome came into being, the chariot was already on the way out as a battlefield weapon. It basically had evolved as far as it could on the technology of the time, and cavalry was increasingly evolving to take it's place (which probably saw it's apex in Central Asia when the stirrup was combined with the short bow).

As for Roman horses, it is simply their evolution. Larger stockier horses are an advantage if they are bred to carry large loads in cold climates (remember, the Romans were primarily traders). Large horses were a great advantage in early iron age Europe, not the slimmer and faster Arabian stock.

When I look at "Biblical Archaeology", I first realize that we are looking at not 1 or 2 books, but dozens of books, which in the earliest versions were what was printed from absolutely ancient oral histories. Oral histories that stretched back thousands of years. This is obviously seen when one dissects the numbers used. Almost any time somebody does a long journey, the length of time is 40. Generally 40 days, but in one very famous instance 40 years. The number 40 pops up over and over and over again, as does the number 7.

Did it really rain for 40 days? Did the Children of Israel really wander the desert for 40 years? Were they really enslaved for 400 years before the coming of Moses? Probably not, but the use of 40 or a power of 40 is all to common, as it is in all ancient oral traditions. And that none of these ancient oral histories were really written down until fairly recently in history, the Babylonian Exile, in around 600 BCE (roughly 500 years after the reign of King David).

Oral traditions are both amazingly detailed, and at the same time utterly lacking in actual information. This king sired that king, who was over thrown by this foreign invader, which was then thrown out by another king. Oral traditions are great for that, but what is lacking first of all is a real timeframe. Unless you can figure out when the rule of such and such a king was, you do not know when it happened. Most consider Jesus having been born in 1 CE. Well, we know it is more accurately 3-4 BCE, or what at the time would have been roughly year 23 of the reign of Caesar Gaius Octavius, proclaimed Augustus (most nations had a calendar based upon the years of the reign of their rulers).

And of course the Hyksos entered into Egypt, first as refugees then as invaders and rulers, and were finally driven out. If those were your people, would you tell your children and grandchildren that you were conquerors who were forced out, or that you were a righteous people living with God who went to a "Promised Land"? And after a hundred years or so, would this not change even further, until eventually it would morph into the Egyptians making you stay?

Hell, we see such happen in the US with White Supremacists. Look at how many romantically portray the US Civil War as some kind of grand righteous crusade against Imperialism and "foreign domination".

 

I loved your post and of course they would tell their children they were conquerors rather than refugee.

 

Fascinating!!!!!!

Good post.... I would give this Rep if I could....... but that feature is no longer available here apparently because you closed that account?!