Theory: Why The Exodus Myth Exists

Hi Buz,Take your time with the itinerary discussion, I know how difficult it can be to find the time to reply to some posts, while other posts take only a few minutes.The problem I have with the chariot wheels is that two different sources, one that relies heavily on the other, are saying that there were two different types of chariots wheels that were unique to the 18th dynasty. Wyatt says that the 8 spoked ones were unique, Moller says it was the four spoked, so it is a bit confusing. Then we have another website saying that the four spoked chariot wheels were indeed used by some of the 19th dynasty armies. Doesn't all this conflicting information give you cause for concern?Brian.

Hi Digger,Here is a little forumla to play around with in Excel if you have it.70*1.024^43070 is the original group, 1.024 is an annual growth rate of 2.4%, the 'power' of 430 is the 430 years the Israelites were said to have been in Egypt.At 2.4% the number of Israelites leaving Egypt would be 1 879 660 people. No group has ever reproduced at this rate for that sustained a period of time, especially in ancient times before the industrial revolution and the advances in medicine. It wasn't until the rise of urban centres that population started to grow.Thutmosis III's army had less than 50 000 men, and this army had to control the entire empire. The Israelites would have had nothing to fear from a group about 40 times smaller than they were.We need to seriously reinterpret the biblical narratives.There is no reference that I know of in the Bible where God tells the Israelites to stop breeding like rabbits.Brian.

Back at Message 196, Willowtree notes, "This means there were a little less/little more (than 605,550 males 20 years and older) the year before when they departed Egpyt."Actually, Exodus 38:26 puts the number of males "twenty years old and up" at 605,550 for purposes of the assessment to pay for the tabernacle about 7 months earlier than the divinely required census data at Numbers 1:46 where the exact same figure is given for all males aged 20 years and up.You know something miraculously divine is happening when, out of a group of 605,550 men of various ages and states of health, not one individual who dies is not immediately replaced by another just turning twenty.What a story!Peace. Ab.

This is not exactly how it was. Those two sources, Wyatt and Moller didn't really rely on one another. Wyatt was the person who pioneered this research, others got into it and a couple of decades or so after it was first discovered Moller and others have picked up the ball and ran with it. The problem is because of the Saudis the research has so far gone about as far as it can go as I understand it. It's somewhat like National Geographic's Ballard and what he's found in the Black Sea. The Russians are restricting that, I believe. Not sure where that's at presently though.Wyatt who preceeded others certainly did not rely on Moller and my understanding is that Moller has no connection presently with Wyatt's organization, though he gleans what information he deems credible from them. Moller does not rely on Wyatt for determination on the spoke wheels. He gets that from the Museums, etc and from what he observes in the gulf. I believe Moller includes four and six wheel spokes. Isn't that what I've been saying? I'm not sure Wyatt claimed the 8 spoke was the most popular or that he limited the site to the 8 spoke wheel. Can you provide a source from where you got this? Don't forget that all Wyatt had was scuba gear to work with. At least that's how I understood it, unless he used more on later expeditions. Evidently you need to revisit the link and reread what is said. If I recall correctly it says that during the latter half of the 18th dynasty the four spoke began to, I say 'began to' become less popular in favor of the six spoke wheel which by the 19th dynasty was the more desireable choice. So it appears that there were relatively long transitional periods of chariot design and engineering.

I've detailed this segment of your message 170 on page 12 to show how you've chopped up my statements in such a manner as to confuse the message I endeavored to convey so let me reassemble my statements and elaborate on them.1. 'Here's how it likely worked. Note that in verse 8 they "passed through the midst of the sea into the wilderness." This is the crossing of the (un-named) sea.'By 'un-named sea, all I meant that it was not named in this particular text. It was named as the Red Sea in other texts, such as in Exodus 15:4 where this song says Pharoah was drowned in the 'sea' and his captains in the 'Red Sea'. In this song of commemoration both the sea (un-named) where Pharoah is mentioned and the sea (named Red Sea) where Pharoah's captains are mentioned are obviously one and the same sea. The Bible is not a book of isolated unrelated statements. It's a book you master so as to include all the related texts on a given subject in order to arrive at the whole truth of your study subject.2."Then the text proceeds to detail every encampment of their itinerary. They went here and there and by the way, they also arrived on the shore of the Red Sea again, but please note that it doesn't say that they crossed it this time. They likely encamped by it again on their looooong wilderness journey, but this time on the East shore of Aqaba."Now after I've reassembled my statement the "here and there and the "by the way" should make sense.
A. Every encampment of their 40 year wandering is listed.
B. Referring to these encampments I go on to say they went here and there and by the way, one of these encampments happend to be on on or near the shore of the Red Sea which I believe and the researched evidence indicates to be the East shore of the Red Sea. 1. The first 120 miles to Aqaba where thay would've crossed was covered in an undetermined number of days. The text says they had fire by night and cloud by day so they could travel "by day and by night." This was a trip which was to be as expeditious as at all possible. So They traveled day and night, obviously making rest stops whenever needed. Yes they only made a few encampments on this relatively long journey but encampments were likely only made in segments of the journey and days apart from one another.
2. The third encampment is on the beach at Aqaba where Pharoah arrives on the scene. The text does not say how long Pharoah waited before embarking on the persuit. After he decides to persue, he must assemble and equip his men, horses and chariots with food and all. Then he must stop at night as well as give his men and horses breaks in the hot wilderness sun of the days. He must fix broken wheels, axles and so forth along the way. The text says God caused his wheels to come off and likely this did not only apply to the sea but to land along the way.Now, after they cross the sea, all these encampments, one at the sea shore, cover a period of 40 years. Each encampment was a relatively long stay, likely several years. Yes they started relatively near where they ended up, but many miles were covered, nobody knowing where all these encampments took them, as to my knowledge, they were ancient locations which is unknown today. There would be little evidence of their trail as encampments do not involve buildings or other evidence for anyone to go by today.Btw Brian, Exodus 16:35 is one reference for documenting the 40 year wilderness encampment sojourn. "And the children of Israel did eat manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat manna, until they came to the borders of the land of Canaan."

Hi Buz, But they are, at least, talking about the same collection of chariot wheels in the Gulf of Aqabah.When I ask ’ So what is it that was unique to the period, eight spoked wheels or 4 spoked wheels? I am trying to establish which of the chariot wheels are supposed to be unique to the 18th dynasty, thus enabling us to claim that the Exodus therefore must have happened during the 18th Dynasty because certain chariot wheels were only used during that period.But you say this ‘ I believe I already addressed this going with the four and six spoke most of it and a few 8 spoke. Buz, this describes every chariot wheel ever made, 4, 6 AND 8 spokes! So basically every chariot wheel ever made was unique to the 18th dynasty, did the 19th use 3 spoke or 5 spoke ones, or were they unichariots?Your post 172 said: As I stated earlier, the video shows an 18th dynasty chariot from an Egyptian museum with the four spoke wheel such as was photographed in the sea. Then your post 186 informs us: According to the video, there were both four and six spoke wheels during the 18 dynasty as well as some 8 wheel ones, but the one in the museum happened to have the four spoke type. What is it about the chariot wheels exactly that identifies them as unique to the 18th dynasty? The site is here WYATTARCHAEOLOGY On diving down to the sea bed, in 1978, Ron Wyatt and his two sons found and photographed numerous coral encrusted chariot parts. Several dives since then have revealed more and more evidence. One of his finds included an eight spoke chariot wheel, which Ron took to the director of Egyptian Antiquities, Dr. Nassif Mohammed Hassan. After examining it he immediately announced it to be of the eighteenth dynasty, dating the exodus to 1446 BC. When asked how he knew this Dr. Hassan explained that the eight spoke wheel was only used during this period, the time of Ramases II and Tutmoses (Moses) You then contradict your earlier claims by providing evidence (post 209) that says the Egyptians ‘ The Egyptians knew two types of chariots. So now you are saying that the Egyptians NEVER knew of eight spoke chariot wheels?Then: Buz, this says that ‘by the late 18th and early 19th dynasties.’, which means that they were still in use to some degree by the 19th dynasty armies. SO how can Moller or Wyatt, or anyone else, date these wheels solely to the 18th dynasty? Thus, proving exactly what we have all been trying to tell you for weeks now, there are no chariot wheels in the Gulf of Aqabah that were unique to the 18th dynasty.Brian.

Ok, it it makes you happy, I'll scrap the unique bit until I get more knowledge on them and go with the fact that the chariot wheels which were found were used during the 18th dynasty. There's plenty of other factors which I've presented for substantiating my contention that this is indeed the Exodus crossing as well as my explanation of the Biblical itinerary of the event and the forty years of wilderness wandering.

would be to prove that there were Hebrews in Egypt to leave.IMHO, the best efforts to prove that the Exodus even happened would be to start by finding some indications that there was ever a Hebrew population in Egypt. Once that was established, it might be possible to determine if some or all of them left as a group and approximately how many were involved.As recorded in the Bible, the Exodus simply seems totally unworkable. There are far too many parts that are simply unreasonable, illogical and unverified. Many of the most important parts, the existence of the Character Moses for example, simply should be documented somewhere. Yet so far there has been nothing found that might even be interpreted in a way that could support his existence.Second, the size of the body is far too large to have gone unnoticed or to not leave evidence, evidence that would still be available today.Consider the simple issue of encamping two million people. How large a camp would that take? How much area would a single camp for two million people cover?Now tear it down and lets move one day further and set up camp again.Could two million people move far enough in one day so that they could camp on ground that was not camped on by others the night before?Unlikely.To bring any credibility to the Exodus story, certain basic problems need to be resolved. So far, I have see no support for any of the very basic issues involving even the possibility of the original population, or how the logistics of such a large migration could happen without leaving any traces.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

There's really no contradiction here on my part.
1. The Exodus likely occurred in the transition when when the four spoke began to become less desireable and the six spoke began to come in as more desireable. So you have two types, the most abundant likely being the old 4 spoke. Don't forget most of the chariots of Egypt were likely there, both old and new. If there were indeed some 8 spoke ones they were likely for special purpose or the oldest few left.2. I don't think I said the 8 spoke wheel was unique to the 18th dynasty. That doesn't mean there couldn't have been a few there. According to the tour site, as I stated the 4 spoke was most unique to the first half of the 18th dynasty and the 6 spoke more unique to the latter half. I don't see why you make such a fuss over this. Is it because you''re beginning to run outa steam and straining a bit here to keep your ideological engine going?

As I've already explained the video gives good evidence of this from archeological finds of an Austrian team. That may be for another topic to discuss. Hey, all I've seen with my own eyes in my living room on video shows it to be workable. Your problem is that you're still of this narrow minded secularist humanist idiology that a another dimension greater than the human visable natural isn't possible with other unseen beings existing in the universe including the Almighty Architect himself. Again, and I repeat, camps and encampers leave little evidence to be discovered milleniums later. Some of what they left has been found and you reject that so what else can you ask for? You'd figure out some fetched argument for anything if you can't accept all this that we have for the viewing. Nobody knows the exact figure, but two million is likely possible. It would take less area than a city of buildings housing an equal number. There's many areas of the vast wilderness capable of this. Read my posts above. One of them explains that encampments were not a days journey nor were they short encampments, for the most part.This message has been edited by buzsaw, 06-11-2004 10:33 PM

Hi Buz,I’ll answer your last few posts in this one reply, if I miss anything let me know.Post # 217 And they were also used in the 19th Dynasty, therefore the chariot wheels that were found MAY have been used in the 18th OR the 19th Dynasties. We do not know for sure if the wheels found definitely were used in the 18th Dynasty, the style may have been used but these particular wheels may not belong to the 18th.Post 219 But there is a contradiction Buz. You have been informing us for a wee while now about the 4, 6 and 8 spoke chariot wheels, but the link you use to support your argument actually informs us that there were only two kinds of chariots known to the Egyptians, the 4 and the 6 spoke wheels, this is the contradiction you make, you say there are 3 different types of chariot wheel then use a reference to support your case that says there were only two types of chariot wheels:The Egyptians knew two types of chariots. These consisted of the four wheeled chariot which, by the late 18th and early 19th dynasties, were mostly abandoned for the superior six spoke vehicles. The six spoked wheels could be made lighter and were better supported than the heavier four spoked wheels, making the whole chariot more reliable. There is nothing on that page about 8 spoke chariot wheels. But Wyatt claims they were, he claims that an expert told him this was the case. If an expert told him this was true then why isn’t Moller using this as proof, why is he touting the 4 spoke wheels, does Moller deal at all with the ‘fact’ that the 8 spoke wheels were said to be unique to the period. Now, it doesn’t matter what Wyatt says here, apparently the director of Egyptian Antiquities told Wyatt that the 8 spoke wheels were unique so Moller surely has to deal with this ‘fact’. According to the tour site there was only ever 4 and 6 spoke wheels, and they say that both were used to some degree during both dynasties. Exactly Buz, it is called objective historical enquiry. I am interested in all the details of a particular area of research, not just the bits and pieces that I think make sense to my arguments. If someone makes a fundamental error, as in the Rameses was an 18th dynasty pharaoh, it alerts the researcher as to the quality of the claims being made. Yeah Buz, you got me quivering under the huge weight of your concrete arguments The reason I am interested in the chariot wheels is because if any of them were unique to the 18th dynasty THEN we would have a time frame in which to set these wheels, and then we could see how they fit into the historical background of the time. As the 4 and 6 spoke wheels were used during both the 18th and 19th dynasties, then we do not know for sure when the particular wheels in the Gulf of Aqabah may have ended up there.On to Moses magical mystery tour.Post 215: Well it is the crossing of the only sea that is mentioned, therefore it must be the sea that was crossed by the Exodus group. But Exodus 15:4 says that they were drowned in the Reed Sea. Look at any Bible printed after the mid 1960’s and they will either say Reed Sea, or have a footnote explaining the error in translation.The Reed Sea Buz, the Gulf of Aqabah doesn’t have any reeds. Named Reed Sea you mean. So why don’t you use it that way? Why don’t you actually read what the Bible is saying and use it in context, what you are proposing is impossible. Look at exactly you are proposing Buz.. Yes, except that they didn’t ‘wander’ for the full forty years, they camped at Kadesh-Barnea for 38 of the 40 years. So you are proposing that the Israelites actually went past the Gulf of Aqabah THEN turned back, went around the sea again, and then crossed it?Lets look at exactly you are proposing, if I am incorrect then let me know.Now the east side of the Gulf of Aqabah, in relation to Egypt, is the far side of the sea, so the Israelites would have needed to go around the tip of the Gulf of Aqabah and then down the eastern side. So you are then wishing to place Etham on the eastern side of the Gulf of Aqabah and Pi-Hahiroth on the western side? Remember that the Israelites ‘turned back’ (numbers 33:7) when they left Etham and then arrived at Pi-Hahiroth before crossing the sea back into the eastern side again. Now Etham HAS to be on the Eastern side of the Gulf of Aqabah because if it is on the western side and they ‘turn back’ before crossing the sea, then it cannot be the Gulf of Aqabah they crossed.Remember Buz, it is only AFTER they turn back that they cross the sea. You have the group walking for around 200 miles and only camping twice. Now at 6 miles a day that would take them a month at least. Even if we over look the impossibility of a massive group taking about two weeks to move between any two points, the Pharoah’s armies would have caught up with the Israelites long before this time had passed.The Reed Sea crossing HAS to be located in Egypt, it is the only location that makes any sense. The Pharaoh had his best chariots out after them, they even overtook the Israelite, it is unrealistic to expect this to take over a month. But we can put a reasonable ‘least number of days’ figure on it. We can still go with the 120 miles, but the locating of Etham on the east side of the sea, the turning back adds a lot on, but at 6 miles a day we are talking at least 20 days. Tell me Buz, how far would you expect one of pharaoh’s best chariots to travel in 20 days? I think my money would be on one of Pharaoh’s chariots being more expeditious than anyone in the Israelite group. They can travel day and night, but they cannot travel very quickly, they would need to have the Egyptians killed off pretty quickly or they would have been overran. Since Nuweiba is on the western side of the Gulf of Aqabah then the second camp would have to be at the other side of the Gulf of Aqabah because they turned back after they left the second camp. Remember when you were talking about examining the whole Bible and not reading events as if they were isolated incidents, well, if you put the pieces together here you will see why the crossing of the Reed Sea has to be in Egypt.The text actually does say roughly when Pharaoh left to chase after the Israelites, you do have to do a little work to find this out though.If we forget the amalgamation of the three different sources interwoven by the final editor of the Book of Exodus, we find in Exodus 12:31-39 that the Pharaoh was well aware that the Israelites had left, it was him that told them to go. During the night Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said, "Up! Leave my people, you and the Israelites! Go, worship the LORD as you have requested. Take your flocks and herds, as you have said, and go. And also bless me."
The Egyptians urged the people to hurry and leave the country. "For otherwise," they said, "we will all die!" So the people took their dough before the yeast was added, and carried it on their shoulders in kneading troughs wrapped in clothing. The Israelites did as Moses instructed and asked the Egyptians for articles of silver and gold and for clothing. The LORD had made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people, and they gave them what they asked for; so they plundered the Egyptians.

​

The Israelites journeyed from Rameses to Succoth. There were about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children. Many other people went up with them, as well as large droves of livestock, both flocks and herds. With the dough they had brought from Egypt, they baked cakes of unleavened bread. The dough was without yeast because they had been driven out of Egypt and did not have time to prepare food for themselves. There are two different traditions interwoven here, for example, we are told that the Israelites had time to plunder the Egyptians but no time to add yeast to their bread. But the Pharaoh was aware that the Israelites had left, he may have been under the impression that they were returning because the early part f the reference suggests that they only wanted to go and worship God, not that they wished to leave altogether.But, as far as the time delay is concerned Exodus 14:5-9 tells us that the pharaoh left as soon as he heard the Israelites had done a runner, and as everyone in Egypt had been plundered by the Israelites, it wasn’t exactly a well kept secret, so we can assume that he set off after them pretty soon after he heard the news.Exodus 14:5-9 When the king of Egypt was told that the people had fled, Pharaoh and his officials changed their minds about them and said, "What have we done? We have let the Israelites go and have lost their services!" So he had his chariot made ready and took his army with him. He took six hundred of the best chariots, along with all the other chariots of Egypt, with officers over all of them. The LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, so that he pursued the Israelites, who were marching out boldly. The Egyptians-all Pharaoh's horses and chariots, horsemen and troops-pursued the Israelites and overtook them as they camped by the sea near Pi Hahiroth, opposite Baal Zephon. Now another piece of textual evidence here for a quick pursuit is that as soon as he heard the pharaoh set off after the Israelites and actually took over them, if they were a month away then that would have taken some time. Also, how did the pharaoh know where to look for the Israelites, they didn’t go by the expected route? But Egypt was an empire, with armies always at the ready in case of revolt or invasion. You have spoken about Pi-hahiroth being an Egyptian fort, surely there would have been Egyptian soldiers there when the Israelites arrived there? Why does he have to stop at night, he can follow the pillar of fire as well as the Israelites can. The whole army wouldn’t stop if a few chariots had broken wheels, why would they do that? The text only says this as the Egyptians were actually in the sea, you are adding to the text. But this is contrary to the biblical account Buz, the Bible says that the Israeites camped at Kadesh-Barnea for 38 of the 40 years in the wilderness:From The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible Ed. George Arthur Buttrick, Abingdon Press, New York, 1962.Entry 'Kadesh-Barnea' After Moses and the Israelites left Mount Sinai they journeyed north westwards across the 'great and terrible wilderness' (eltih) toward the hill country of the Amelekites and settled in Kadesh-Barnea (Deut. 1:19-20)

​

The corresponding passage in Num. 13:26 speaks of the location as the wilderness of Paran, but it is evident that Kadesh is meant. It was from here that a company was sent out to spy out the land of Canaan. When their favourable report led to the divine decree that the entire generation would perish in the wilderness and only their children inherit the land promised by God, it was from Kadesh that the Israelites, rejecting the counsel of Moses, made a hasty attempt to force their way into the hill country of the Maorites and were beaten back with great slaughter. After this event, they remained in Kadesh 'for many days'.

​

It is not certain how long this sojourn in Kadesh lasted. The whole series of chapters from Numbers 13 to 15 has no mention of any removal, and chapter 20 finds them still in Kadesh, so that it might be inferred from them that almost the entire period of the wilderness sojourn was spent there. From, Dictionary of the Bible John L Makenzie, Chapman, London, 1968.Entry Kadesh. In Dt. 1:2 the Israelites reach Kadesh after 11 days travel from Horeb, in Dt. 1:46 they remained there a long time, more explicitly 38 years (Dt. 2:14) setting out from Kadesh to the stream Zered There should be some evidence of their stay at Kadesh-Barnea s they camped there for a long time before setting out on the ‘Conquest’ of Canaan. Remember as well that of the millions who left Egypt, it was only Joshua and Gideon who were allowed to enter Canaan, the rest of them died. I would expect to find a few of the millions of bodies buried at Kadesh barnea but before the 10th century BCE there is no sign of anything.Also, Nomads sometimes do leave traces of their travels. Most nomadic groups have some degree of interaction with urban centres, mostly involving trade of some sort. The Nuer of southern Sudan for example trade meat and animal hides for crops and metal jewellery and the jewellery is obviously very resilient, this can be one way to trace a group. The Israelites must have taken a great deal of gold and silver from the Egyptians, it is unreasonable not to expect to find something at Kadesh-Barnea from the alleged date of the Exodus. Another point on this is that the areas of Palestine that can be assocated with the settlement of the Israelites also show absolutely no awareness of Egyptian influence in the region. James Weinstein writes that were it not for the Bible, anyone looking at the Palestinain archaeological data today would conclude that whatever the origin of the Israelites, it was not Egypt. (Weinstein in Frerichs and Lesko 1997 Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence Eisenbrauns, WInina Lake page 98) Yes, it says they ate manna for forty years, not that they wandered continuously for forty years.I know you are busy, so reply when you can. In particular, it would be good to see where you locate Etham and Pi-Hahiroth, and also keep in mind that the Israelites ‘turned back’ after their second camp.Wouldn't it have been great of the author of Exodus actually named the pharaoh, for such a central character to be unnamed is very surprising. If the had named the pharaoh it would have saved a lot of time and effort, but this is the problem with assuming that the Bible is a history book.See you later Buz.Brian.

Hi Buz, Is this the work of Manfred Beitak at Tell el Da'ba / Avaris?Brian.

If he is refering to Tell el Da'ba, then the most recent things I've ever been able to find are the studiies from the 1990s. But nowhere in those have I found anything related to Hebrews.There is lots of cross correlations showing the Hyksos influence, its destruction, reinvestment and growth with periods of occupation from the Middle Kingdom to as late as the XVIII Dynasty, its possible Minoan connections but no sudden unaccounted for abandonment and no Hebrew connection.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

HI Jar,I have Bietak's 1996 book 'Avaris The Capital of the Hyksos: Recent Excavations at Tell el' Da'ba' published by the British Museum, and I would wager that this is what is being used by Moller.Bietak's work has been used by maximalists before, by Bryant Wood for example, but there are no Hebrew connections at all. But, Bietak mentions a large Syro-Palestinian influence at the site, evidently this must mean Hebrews were there, it doesn't matter if a connection can be demonstrated or not apparently.Brian.

Agreed. Or Phoenicians, or ...My problem with all of this is that the earliest evidence I can find for a Hebrew presence in Egypt is around the 6th Century BC. There have been scarabs found with Hebrew inscriptions from around then.The Egyptians had a long history of documenting various minorities within their realm, particularly those that caused troubles. But no where are the Hebrews mentioned.Personally, I see little reason to doubt that there was a Hebrew presence in Egypt during the periods from the Second Intermediate Period and on, but since there is no mention of them, they must have been a small minority.Even the whole Exodus story becomes reasonable if the size is reduced by several orders of magnitude and the idea of Moses as the second highest person in Egypt and the loss of a Pharoah and the whole army are thrown out. But it is impossible to believe that the loss of a Pharoah went unnoticed and unrecorded in Egypt, or any of the other Nation States in the area.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion