"THE EXODUS REVEALED" VIDEO

Nice try.....butThere were other world powers at that time. Egypt was constantly dealing or fighting with both the Nubians and the varying powers to the North. Yet no one noticed.You can try to make it something that might have been covered up, but we are talking a big, big event. If the numbers you claim are correct it is about 100 times the population needed to build the Great Pyramid. Even if Egypt tried to keep that secret, they certainly could not keep the Nubians or Assyrians from reporting or recording it.Then there is the matter of losing the whole army and the Pharoah. That would certianly have been noticed.And an Asiatic presence in Egypt (something that IS documanted, does not imply a Hebrew presence. Sorry, but so far none of you have been able to provide any evidence.Finally, would you like to address the issue of Jerico and Ai?I believe that the Exodus did happen. But it was more likely a few hundred people, maybe as many as a few thousand. And it most likely happened sometime after 1200BC, not in the 1400s.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I am sorry to inform you that Lysimachus HAS touted this idea as fact - and HAS produced spurious "evidence" to support it. An obvious examples have been the "unique" alternation of names found in the 18th Dynasty Pharoahs - which is easily seen to be non-unique just by examining the list of Pharoahs he provided as evidence. Then there is is claim that the "Dream Stele" supported his case which relied on identifying the Throne Name as the nomen. Then there is the misrepresentation of the "birth myth" of Hatshepsut.Moreover Lysimachus has rejected contrary evidence out of hand, The best answer we get is to point to uncertainties (which somehow don't matter when he is making claims).Moreover he has not produced anything close to adequate evidence.I was not asking a leading question - I was pointing out plain facts and requesting an explanation.I have to say that I do not find an assertion on arkdiscovery.com that there is evidence convincing in the light of these facts.Nor do I find the claim concerning the "principle God" convincing. It seems that repeating names was quite common within a Dynasty. On Wyatt's hypothesis we could reasonably expect Ahmose, Hatshepsut and Tutankhamun to adopt the Amenhotep title - but they did not.Now I've already done some investigation and found evidence contradicting Wyatt's hypothesis. And none supporting it. If you can name reasonably accessible sources that support Wyatt's claim even in part then I am prepared to go further.On the basis of what I have seen the scenario is very far-fetched and can be dismissed without any hypocrisy.

According to my reading Amenhotep III's greatness was in building monuments - not conquest. He mainly kept the armies home in Egypt. The ebb in Egypt's military started there. Akenaten had internal problems in his conflict with the priests of Amun and moving the capital to Amarna.

Can you post some web sources on what coral will and will not grow on? I've looked and not found much that is useful.

You basically defended Lysimachus' point that we shouldn't be looking for Raamses, because if it was build during the reign of Ramses II, then Pi would have been used (might have been used, we don't know).
You start to defend the fact that Pi-Ramesse is in Qantir. I can live with that (as stated before) and it's fine that it's older as well.
You don't state anything about Pithom though, except There are no two candidtates, Pithom has been found. And it's completely correct with this quote from exodus 1:11"
"....., and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh.
They build store cities for the pharaoh's!!
Now, even if Pithom was older (which hasn't been shown yet), you must at least confirm that Pithom was used as a storage city when Ramses build it. The Qantir site as build by Ramses II also fits this bill perfectly. Before Ramses, Qantir Pi-Ramesse was not used as a storage facility.
I'm using the bible to prove a point here..... I never placed this city anywhere. I couldn't care less if they wrote Raamses but actually meant Pi-Ramesse. Let's face facts that you and Lysimachus use this argument. I simply stated that we don't know where Raamses is but we do know where Pithom is. You both keep telling me Raamses might be/might not be Pi-Ramesse.As a side note, concerning Lysimachus:
Please stop using the claim that the Egyptians might shortly have used 4-6-8 spokes during the reign of Thutmosis III and then keep using pictures of Thutmosis IV to back up this statement: Thutmosis IV did not reign around 1445, but Thutmosis III did.One final time about the wheel:
Conclusion so far:
Lysimachus claims; they have not been disclaimed by egyptologists as being something else but Egyptian. So, they are Egyptian and have 4-6-8 spokes, just like in the period of Thutmosis III. Uses pictures of Thutmosis IV to back this up.
Hydarnes claims; The Egyptians might have used foreign chariots. Chariots of the Egyptians look like chariots from neighboring people.Look guys, I can't argue against someone who claims they're all Egyptian and someone who claims they might be foreign or looked foreign. If foreign wheels looked like Egyptian ones, then these also would have slim rims and spokes.
My claim is "The Egyptians wheels used slim rims and spokes. The only identifiable wheel has neither. Pictures of Egyptian wheels have not produced any wheel which looks like the one found on the seabed. (WITHOUT CLAIMING THAT THEY ARE ASSYRIAN!!), the Assyrians wheels of a later time used much thicker rims and spokes, resembling the wheel better that the Egyptian wheels we have found/seen pictures of so far. But these are of a period, hundred of years later.
During the 17th century BC, the Myceneans used 4 spoked wheels f.i. Why can't it be theirs?http://www2.truman.edu/~capter/jins343/064.jpgI claim the wheel doesn't look Egyptian at all. The coral wheels can't be used, because they might have been drawn to fit an assumption. If I wanted to prove that wooden shields and swords were used in the gulf of Aqaba, I could have used the same coral structures Moller has used to prove it. You have to be kidding here. I know of this dagger but did Tutankhamun live before Thutmosis III (or IV)? No, he didn't. There are no other finds of Iron in the 18th dynasty and it's only mentioned twice, once by Thutmosis III (how unfortunate ) and the next historic mention of it is by Ramses II. Both mention it as great gifts.But, if the Pharaoh used foreign chariots. Whose horses did he use? His own had been killed by the 4th/5th plague (I can't remember which it was). Livestock was killed as well, so the cattle bones found can't have been Egyptian either.LucyP.s Usefull link of Pharaoh history, dating (+ list of dating by many other Egyptologists)
Ancient Egypt - Dynasty XVIIIThis message has been edited by Prince Lucianus, 07-28-2004 08:05 AM

---

Bible
Search Results
"Death & Dead" were found 827 times in 751 verses.Thats a Whole Lotta Suffering

quote:

---

Amazing. So you admit that Nassif Hassan did say this, but now since you find yourself at a loss, you are forced to revert by picking at straws and state that he "didn't" have a doctorate at the time he said it. So, if he had said it when he didn't have a doctorate, but then obtained a doctorate the next week and still hadn't changed his mind, would that mean that his statement DIDN'T COUNT?

---

Or maybe some of us expect that if someone is going to be presented as an expert, that someone actually does so. We still have zero/zip to know if he was qualified to make the statement he did. Even worse, since we don’t have the basis of his thinking, we cannot even attempt to falsify his findings. This is really poor form. That you throw out a week with no support shows desperation to make some sort of case.

There are many "coral growth" websites.
Most concern a specific coral or location.
this one has some general info:Attention Required! | CloudflareThe main conclusion is:
It depends on available space, age of the coral, type of coral (soft/hard), temperature of the water, amount of sunlight and foodaccessabiltiy.Lucy

---

Bible
Search Results
"Death & Dead" were found 827 times in 751 verses.Thats a Whole Lotta Suffering

quote:

---

According to my reading Amenhotep III's greatness was in building monuments - not conquest. He mainly kept the armies home in Egypt. The ebb in Egypt's military started there. Akenaten had internal problems in his conflict with the priests of Amun and moving the capital to Amarna.

---

And demonstrates that Egypt was enjoying a militarily and economically stable Empire. We have historical correspondence letters which show a great deal of diplomacy between Egypt and her foreign possessions.There was also a campaign made against a rebelious Nubia during Amenhotep's reign.I am very aware of the strife between Akhenaten and the priests of Amun, but this does not logically justify zero military action for crumbling vassal kingdoms if an army WAS present in Egypt.If Akhenaten was brilliant enough to save his throne from the encroaching priests of Amun, it would only make sense to save your Empire via militlary action as well, which he conspicuously did not.This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 07-28-2004 08:20 AM

Thanks for the complete picture.
This one is apprecaited.Of course I saw it was from the Cairo Museum, but I meant was, which pharaoh is it representing! The name on the left seem to represent Thutmosis, but I can see no feature that specifies which Thutmosis.
About the picture. Although it does show 4 and 8 spokes being used simultaneously, it doesn't show they were used by the same people.
The 4 spoked wheels are fleeing from the pharaoh who's crushing them with his superior 8 spokes chariot.
It looks like a propaganda drawing, showing an opponent who is technically inferior to the Egyptians, crushed by the Pharaoh.LucyThis message has been edited by Prince Lucianus, 07-28-2004 08:20 AM

---

Bible
Search Results
"Death & Dead" were found 827 times in 751 verses.Thats a Whole Lotta Suffering

The military action in Nubia was early in the reign of Amenhotep III. Later in his reign Egypt was at peace.It is entirely possible that Akenaten was not concerned with the internal squabbles of the petty Canaanite kings being more concerned with affairs internal to the administration of Egypt. The Empire itself was not in danger - only a small part of it, if any.

The "petty squabble" is a product of your imagination alone. Most sources agree that Egypt was seriously losing its international prestige under Akhenaten and that the empire was experiencing a severe decline both militarily and economically. We also have records of the High Priest alluding to the egregious situation in the Empire.It's obvious that you're simply trying to minimize a piece of history [that we know all too well] to fit your incredulity.This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 07-28-2004 09:09 AMThis message has been edited by Hydarnes, 07-28-2004 09:11 AM

No, the "petty squabbles" come from reading some of the Amarna letters, which are the only source so far which has been referred to in this thread. They show Canaanite rulers fighting each other and blaming each other while proclaiming loyalty to Egypt. No specific evidence of anything more has bene produced in this thread.We both know that you have no direct evidence for the conclusion you are trying to work towards. Nor do you have a good explanation for the absence of such evidence.

You are referring to the young children being told the Torah, New Testament, and Koran, Book of Mormon are literally true because God wrote them? This is why our government(s) are withholding the facts about UFO's and the aliens among us?buzsaw,Have you read The Bible Unearthed? and Who wrote the Bible?
The Bible was written by priests and prophets putting forth their stories. They may have genuinely believed the myths handed down to them, and they may have genuinely felt their feelings came from God, but that doesn't mean there was a Moses, or an exodus. The history and archeology of those times and places does not support the Torah's stories. Face the facts. You are simply arguing and grabbing at straws to preserve your emotional investment in a religion that was imposed on the peoples of Europe and elsewhere by the Holy Roman church. There is a tremendous cultural momentum from over a thousand years of propaganda, but now rationality has emerged and is studying the facts.This is threatening to many, but then why come here and try to convince others that your fairy tales are really real, particularly if you aren't interested and willing to read the research and instead use silly claims like "Simple. Their whole educational ideological structure would be totally devastated." What devastation? Schools burnt and closed down? The country plunged into illiteracy? No more doctors educated? Whatever are you talking about, what do you imagine will happen and why?peace,
lfen

quote:

---

You basically defended Lysimachus' point that we shouldn't be looking for Raamses, because if it was build during the reign of Ramses II, then Pi would have been used (might have been used, we don't know).

---

I've never stated that we "shouldn't be looking for Raamses", that is your invention. My point is that even if the proposed site for "Pi-Ramesse" was the same location for the city of Ramses that the Isralites constructed, it doesn't mean that Rameses II was the Pharaoh of the Exodus for clearly stated reasons.Furthermore, "Pi" WOULD have been used if it was referring to that specific time of the city, especially considering "Pi" in Pithom, why not Raamses? The significance of this prefix I have already established,...Why must I constantly reiterate for you? I would be greatly obliged if you would read carefully the content of my posts the first time, as it would make this dialogue much easier for the both of us.

quote:

---

There are no two candidtates

---

Incorrect. While the most popularly accepted location is that of Tell el-Maskhuta, there is another location that has also been suggested as the location for Pithom, known as Tell er-Retabah. The point is, both have shown to predate RamesesII. HE merely rebuilt or put his name on numerous locations and monuments throughout Egypt.

quote:

---

Now, even if Pithom was older (which hasn't been shown yet), you must at least confirm that Pithom was used as a storage city when Ramses build it.

---

Considering that the Pharaoh known as Rameses II was not the king of the Exodus, I fail to see the burden. Nevertheless, archaelogical excavation at Tell el-Maskhutta (the most generally accepted location for Pithom) has yielded possible "grain storage facilities".

quote:

---

The Qantir site as build by Ramses II also fits this bill perfectly. Before Ramses, Qantir Pi-Ramesse was not used as a storage facility.
I'm using the bible to prove a point here.....

---

I'm not acutely familiar with all of the data that would suggest exactly what periods these locations were used specifically for storage. What we do know is that these places predate Rameses II, and the fact that he used these general locations for his new building projects does not ratify his being Pharaoh of the Exodus for that reason. Also consider that "Rameses" was also used as a title for virtually all the kings of Egypt, so something other than "Rameses" would be required to make a proper nexus between the location and Rameses II.Rameses II not only doesn't fit the dating timeline at all, but Merneptah's stele indicates that Israel was already occupying Canaan, totally disqualifying Rameses II as Pharaoh of the oppression.

quote:

---

One final time about the wheel:
Conclusion so far:
Lysimachus claims; they have not been disclaimed by egyptologists as being something else but Egyptian. So, they are Egyptian and have 4-6-8 spokes, just like in the period of Thutmosis III. Uses pictures of Thutmosis IV to back this up.
Hydarnes claims; The Egyptians might have used foreign chariots. Chariots of the Egyptians look like chariots from neighboring people.

​

Look guys, I can't argue against someone who claims they're all Egyptian and someone who claims they might be foreign or looked foreign. If foreign wheels looked like Egyptian ones, then these also would have slim rims and spokes.
My claim is "The Egyptians wheels used slim rims and spokes. The only identifiable wheel has neither. Pictures of Egyptian wheels have not produced any wheel which looks like the one found on the seabed. (WITHOUT CLAIMING THAT THEY ARE ASSYRIAN!!), the Assyrians wheels of a later time used much thicker rims and spokes, resembling the wheel better that the Egyptian wheels we have found/seen pictures of so far. But these are of a period, hundred of years later.
During the 17th century BC, the Myceneans used 4 spoked wheels f.i. Why can't it be theirs?

---

Whether or not the specific origin for these chariots was from Egypt or not is immaterial, the point is, these chariots were employed by Egypt during the 18th dynasty.

quote:

---

"The Egyptians wheels used slim rims and spokes. The only identifiable wheel has neither. Pictures of Egyptian wheels have not produced any wheel which looks like the one found on the seabed. (WITHOUT CLAIMING THAT THEY ARE ASSYRIAN!!), the Assyrians wheels of a later time used much thicker rims and spokes, resembling the wheel better that the Egyptian wheels we have found/seen pictures of so far. But these are of a period, hundred of years later.

---

I disagree with your arbitrary identification of the wheel on the seabed. I have seen a substantial number of Egyptian murals, and one in particular, that match visually well with the description found in Aqaba. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find an adequate picture on the net, I will try to obtain one for you.I will try to say more this evening. I don't want to be late for work.

I just can't believe people have gone to 400+ posts on something that does not exist.The fact that this has not been the biggest story on the planet (perhaps with the Iraq war) for 2 or 3 years tells anyone with common sense that it is a fraud.This would be about the biggest find in archeological history yet somehow nobody has bothered to bring these chariots to the surface.Think about it!