Esau-Edom:

This is a subject that few have ventured on, and therefore, probably one of the lesser understood subjects of Israelite history. This is a subject which we all need to get better acquainted with.

We need to take into account some secular history surrounding him in his early days,. Really, secular history is very much compatible with Bible History, regardless of what the anti-christ Jews and their lap-dogs will tell you, if we are to understand them both correctly.

As we study this history, we may find the circumstances and lifestyles of the people living at that time entirely different from what we ever dreamed. Unless we can come to an understanding of the background stage of our investigation,w e will miss much of the story.

THE DEMISE OF EDOM:

To begin with, let us consider about the Phoenicians, and a better than normal article in a book entitled “Early Progress,” by Willis Mason West. Sometimes articles found in smalla r history books are more concise and, therefore, give a better overall view on a subject. Quoting from this book, pp. 55-57:

“The Phoenicans dwelt on a little strip of broken coast shut off from the interrior by the Lebanon Mountains. Long before 1000 B.C., they HAD FAR OUTRUN EGYPT AND BABYLONIA IN TRADE, so that we think of thier country as almost the first land of commerce.

“The Mediterranean was to them all that the Nile was to the Egyptians. Their many harbors invited them seaward, and the “cedar of Lebanon” offered the best of ship timber. At first, half traders, half pirates, their crews crept from island to island, to barter with the natives or to sweep them off for slaves, as chance might best suggest.

“Then, more daringly, they sought wealth farther and farther on the sea, until they passed even the Pillars of Hercules, into the open Atlantic, and we see them exchanging the precious tin of Britain, the yellow amber of the Baltic, and the slaves and ivory of West Africa, for the spices, gold, scented wood, and precious stones of India.

“The ship that Neco sent to circumnavigate Africa was manned by Phoenician sailors; and the chief Phoenician cities, Tyre and Sidon, wee among the most splendid and wealthy in the world. The Hebrew prophet Ezekiel exclaimed:

‘O thou that art situate at the entry of the sea, which art a merchant of the people...O Tyrus, thou hast said, I am of perfect beauty. THY BORDERS ARE IN THE MIDST OF THE SEAS, thy builders have perfected thy beauty. They have made all thy ship boards of fir trees...they have taken cedars from Lebanon to make masts for thee...have made thy benches of ivory, brought out of the isles of Chittim (Kittim; Kition in Cyprus). Fine linen with broidered work from Egypt was that which thou spreadest forth to be thy sail...blue and purple from the isles of Elishah (North Africa) was that which covered thee...all the ships of the sea with their mariners were in thee to occupy thy merchandise... with silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded in thy fairs...’ (Ezekiel 27:1‑27) (Ezekiel also names among the articles of exchange, emeralds, coral, ivory, ebony, rubies, wheat, honey, oil, balm, wine, wool, yarn, spices, horses, mules, lambs, and goats).

“And when we think of these adventurous ‘ships’ we must try to remember that they were still only small open boats, driven mainly by oars. Sometimes the boatmen ued also a square sail, but only to run before the wind. (It was many hundreds of years before sailors learned to ‘tack.’)

“They had no compass. Their only guides, when they were out of sight of land, were the sun and stars. Centuries later, the Greeks still called the North Star the ‘Phoenicians’ Star,’ becuase the daring Phoenician mariners had become famous for steering by it.

“THE PHOENICIANS WERE THE FIRST COLONIZERS: They fringed the larger islands and th eshores of th eMediterranean with trading stations, which beame new centers of civilization. Carthage, Utica, Gades, (Cadiz, on the Atlantic), were among their colonis.

“They worked in tin mines in Colchis, in Spain, and finally in Britain, and so made possible the manufacture of bronze on a laqrge scale than before, to replace stone implements. Probably they first introduced brone into many parts of Europe.

“To get things wherewith to trade, the Phoenicians became manufacturers, learnign from Egyptians and Babylonians to work in metals, glass, and textiles. Hammer, loom, potter’s wheel, engraver’s knife, were always busy in tyre, and quantities of their products are found in ancient tombs of Greece and Italy; the earliest European homes of civilizaqtion.

“Especially prised, too, among wealty and ruling classes of allthe world was a rich crimson dye, the long-famous ‘Tyrian purple’ (obtained form the bodies of a shellfish that abounded near Phoenicia), with which Phoenician weavers colored their most costly woolen robes. THE MAIN SERVICE OF THE PHOENICIANS WAS TO SPREAD CIVILIZATION THAT OTHERS HAD CREATED. They were ‘missionaries of culture.’ Especially did they teach th Greeks, who were to teach the rest of Europe.

“ONE MIGHTY INVENTION DOES SEEM DUE CHIEFLY TO THE PHOENICIANS THEMSELVES. When the Egyptians first conquered syria, about 1600 B.C., the Phoenicians were using the cuneiform script...But their commerce made it necessary to keep complicated accounts and to communicate with agents in distant ports.

“This called for a simpler way of writing; and about 1000 B.C., we find them with A TRUE ALPHABET OF TWENTY-TWO LETTERS (for consonant sounds only) probably based upon Egyptians ‘sound-symbols.’ This, it is well said, was ‘their chief export.’ All the alphabets in use in the world to-day are derived from this one.”

Another source which spell out why Phoenicia became an ideal area for a major defenseive seaport in ancient times is examined by the “Cyclopædia of Universal History,” Vol. I, pp. 238-239, by John Clark Ridpath, LL.D.:

“The western slope of Libanus, dropping down to the Mediterranean, extending along the coast for about one hundred and eighty miles, constituted Phoenicia, one of the smallest, but at the same time most important, countires...Next to the sea the land had no great fertility, being a mere strip of sand; but here was the possiblity of commerce. Her, too, rose the long line of date-palms, which gave the name of Phoenicia; land of puple date.

“In its widest part the country was scarcely twenty miles in breadth, and anon(soon) the mountain spurs came within a mile of the sea. An insignificant belt of sand! But Nature had chosen it as the spot from which should begin the dominion of man over the deeps. Commerce was a necessity of the situation.

“The forests of Lebanon have been proverbial in all ages. The heavy cedars almost overhung the sea. To cut these giants of the wood and floot them down the short swift streams to the coast gave a vent to the energies and profit to the industry of men at a time when Egypt was still fresh in your youth.

“All this would have passed perhaps but for the safe and frequent harbors which indented the shore, holding at perpetual bay the storms of the boisterous sea. These quiet havens of Phoenicia were the birthplace of the navies of the world. Here man first learned to contend successfully with the perils of the open ocean and to make Neptune, as well as amars and Jove, his confderate and friend.

“The fleets of Phoenicia put boldly to sea. When History was still in the dawn the strange crafts of the hardy maratime (sic) people were seen creepign around the shores of the Mediterranean. In the great days of Assyria and Babylon the overland trade form the valley of the Euphrates and still further east was brought to the Phoenician coast to be carried to the distant colonies and growing nations of the West.

“By and by these same fleets became important in discovery and in war. The cities of Phoenicia grew rich. They were arbiters of the deep. Giovernment flourished. The court became first known and then famous as far as the knowledge of man extended by communication in the earth; insomuch that the insignificant strip of territory in which they were situated possessed a greater importance in the destinies of the ancient world thatn did whole kingdoms which were given up to torpor (lethargy) and inaction.”

From the book “Tracing Our White Ancestors,” by Frederick Haberman, pp. 22-23, we get the following concerning the Phoenicians:

“The Phoenicians: Having identified the Aryan race with the Adamic White Caucasian race originating in the mountains of Central Asia, let us now turn to the so-called Phoenicians, who were known to be the leading ioneers, merchants, inventors, and mariners of antiquity, who, coming from north of the Persian Gulf, kept pushing eastward (westward) to the shorew of the Mediterranean, following the setting sun through the Pillars of Hercules, sailled northwestward along the Atlantic seaboard of Europe into Britain, along the coasts of Africa, rounded the Cape of Good Hoe, and even crossed the Atlantic to the shores of South and Central America, as we have record of.

“Let us bear in mind here that it was the Greeks who gve these ancient mariners and colonizers the name of Phoenicians; and they existed for a period of over 1000 years before the Greeks and continued in name until the Christian era, their language, the Punic, being the commercial language of antiquity, as English is today.

“Let us now analyze the word ‘Phoenician’ and ‘Phoenicia’ Professor George Rawlinson, in his ‘Story of Phoenicia,’ tells us that Phoenicia derived its name from the forests of date or Phoenix palms which grew there in great luxuriance.

“So far so good; but whence did the Phoenix palm derive its name? Horapollo says: ‘A palm branch ws the symbol of the Phoenix.’ Yes, but what or who was the Phoenix? Sanchoniathon, the Phoenician writer, states that ‘Phoenix was the firt Phoenician,’ Phoenix, then, was a man. Now, the word Phoenix is the Greek form of the Egyptian term ‘Pa-Hanok,’ the house of Enoch. In Hebrew Enoch also is Hanok.

“THUS THE MYSTERY OF THAT ANCIENT RACE IS SOLVED; THEY WERE THE SONS AND DESCENDANTS OF ENOCH AND OF NOAH AND HIS THREE SONS, WHO AFTER THE FLOOD STARTED THEIR WESTWARD MARCH. Their descendants have kept it up since, settled first north of the Persian Gulf in the bushlands of Mesopotamia, where they found a dusky race in occupation of the land, the Ancient Summerians, and from thence towards the Mediterranean.

“Chambers Encyclopedia” in the article ‘Phoenicia’ gives us the following account of the origin of the Phoenicians, page 436, Vol. 8: ‘Two accounts have come down to us of the origin of the Phoenicians. According to Herodotus, Strabo, Pliny, and others, they dwelt anciently on the shores of the Persian Gulf, whence they crossed by land to Syria, and settled on the coast of the Mediterranean.

“Herodotus (vii 89) declares this to be their own account of themselves, and Strabo says that there was a similar tradition among th einhabitants of the gulf, who sho showed, in proof of it, Phoenician temples on some of the islands. Justin on the contrary, in his epitome of Trogus Pompelus, declares that they were driven out of their country by an earthquake, and passed to the Mediterranean.’”

THE EGYPTIAN, SINUHE:

At this point, we must take into consideration an Egyptian official who llved somewhere during the 12^th dynasty (1938-1756 B.C.), for this person plays an important role in understanding the events and conditions during the period of time of our Patriachs.

“Which, again, plays an important part in understanding the story of Esau as we will see later on. Thyis man’s name was Sinuhe, and he was proved to be more than a myth. To verify there was such a person, we will quote from “The Enhcyclopedia Britannica © 1994, volume 10, page 840:2b:

‘Sinuhe (fl. 20^th century B.C.): Middle Kindom Egyptian official fo the 12^th dynasty (1938-1756 B.C.) Who fled Egypt to settle in Syria. His biography yields information about politics and social conditions of the time.

‘Sinuhe was an official of the herem maintained for Amenemhet 1 by his queen. While on an expedition to Libya he learned of the king’s assassination (1908 B.C.) And fled either from fright or because of his complicity.

“He intended to travel southward but was blown to the north while crossing the Nile, and he passed into Palestine. After much wandering in Palestine and Lebanon, he was invited to settle with the chieftain of southern Syria, who adopted him and married him to his eldest daughter. In that land Sinhue raised a family and became a veritable patriarh. He defended his father-in-law’s territory and entertained emissaries travelign to and from Egypt.

‘The Pharaoh Sesostris 1 invited Sinuhe to return to Egypt, and Sinuhe eagerly accepted. The king forgave, him his real or imagined crimes and welcomed him with rich gifts; thereafter Sinhue remarried in his homeland, while the pharaoh ordered a fine tomb built for him. Sinuhe’s biography survived as a populare epic; internal evidence sugests that it is based on actual events. The story of Sinhue was adapted by a modern Finnish writer, Mike Waltari, for a popular novel, the Egyptian (1949).’”

EGYPT’S IRON CURTAIN:

For further deails of Sinuhe’s story, we will quote excerpts from “The Bible As History,” by Wener Keller, pp. 59-60:

“With the campaign of Sesostris III about 1850 B.C., we are right in the middle of the patriarchal period. Meantime Egypt had taken possesion of the whole of Canaan: the country now lay under the suzerainty of the Pharaohs.

“Thanks to the arfhaeologists, we possess a unique document from the epoch, a gem of ancient literature. The author; a certain Sinuhe of Egypt. Scene: Canaan. Time: between 1971 and 1928 B.C., under Pharaoh Sesostris 1. Sinuhe, a nobleman in attendance at court, became involved in a political intrigue. He feared for his life and emigrated to Canaan:

‘As I headed north I came to the Princes’ Wall, which was built to keep out the Bedouins and crush the Sand ramblers. I hid in a thicket in case th eguard on the wall, who was on patrol at the time, would see me.

“I did not move out of it till the evening. When daylight came...and I had reache the Bitter lake I collapseed. I was parched with thirst, mhy throat was red-hot. I said to myself: This is the taste of death! But as I made another effort and pulled myself onto my feet, I heard the roaring of cattle and some Bedouins came in sight. Their leader, who had been in Egypt, recognized me. He gave me some water and boiled some milk, and I went with him to his tribe. Theywere very kind to me.’

“Sinuhe’s escape had been successful. He had been able to slip unseen past the great barrier wall on the frontier of the kingdom of the Pharaohs which ran exactly along the line which is followed by the Suez Canal today.

“The ‘Princes’ Wall’ was even then several hundred years old. A priest mentions it as far back as 2650 B.C.: ‘The Princes’ Walls are being built to prevent the Asiatics forcing their way into Egypt. (Bingo-Hurrians!) ‘They want water...to give to their cattle.’ Later on, the children of Israel were to pass this wall many times: there was no other way into Eghypt. Abraham must have been the first of them to see it when he emigrated to the land of the Nile during a famine.” (Genesis 12;10)

Sinuhe contines his story of how he passed form one area in Retenu (the old name for Canaan and Palestine) to another; how he went to Byblos and continued to Kedme (a desert country east of Damascus) where he spent eighteen months. He was welcomed by the chief of Upper Ratenu named Ammi-Enschi. Sinuhe was assured he would be safe and well treated.

“Ammi-Enschi gave Sinuhe priority over his own family, offering him his eldest daughter for a wife, and land to occupy with his children. There was nothing lacking in the way of honey, oil, fruit, trees, corn, barley, along with sheep and cattle. Ammi-Enschi made Sinuhe chief over his tribe in the choicest allotment of his dominion.

“Sinuhe had at his disposal nothing except the finest of food and drink. As the years passed, Sinuhe’s chidlren grew into hardy men,a nd each became ruler of his own tribe. Siuhe’s house became a station of hopitality for all couriers to and from the royal court of Egypt, giving water to the thirsty, befriending the wanderer and protecting the dispossessed.

“Sinuhe became chief protector against the attacks of the Bedouins upon his neighbors and organized defensive measures to protect their family members from becoming slave, safeguarding pastures, wells, sheep, cattle, and stores. Sinuhe, being a great swordsman and archer, personally killed many of the enemy Bedouins along with making defensive strategies. Continuing quoting from “The Bible As History,” by Werner Keller, p. 61:

“Out of his many experiences among the ‘Asiatics’ (Bingo-Hurrians!) A life-and-death duel, which he describes in detail, seems to have made the deepest impression on Sinuhe. A ‘Strong man of Retenu’ had jeered at him one day in his tent and called him out.

“He was sure he could kill Sinuhe and appropriate his flocks and herds and propeties. But Sinuhe like all Egyptians, was a practiced bowman from his earliest days and killed the ‘strong man’ who was armed with shield, spear, and dagge, by putting an arrow through his throat. The spoils that came to him as a result of this combat made him even richer and more powerful.”

MORE ON EGYPT’S IRON CURTAIN, “PRINCES’ WALL”:

For more on Egypt’s “Princes’ Wall,” we will quote from pages 71-72 of “The Bible As History,” by Werner Keller:

“In times of famine, Egypt was for Canaanite nomads their place of refuge and often their only salvation. When the ground dried up in their own country, the land of the Pharaohs always afforded green pastures...

“On the other hand the proverbial wealth of Egypt was often a temptation to thieving bands of daring nomads who were not interested in finding pasture but were much more concerned with the bursting granaries and sumptuous palaces. Often they could only be got rid of by force or arms.

“As a protection against these unwlecome invaders and to keep a closer check on the frontier, the erection of the gret ‘Prinfes’ Wall’ was begun inthe third millennium B.C. It consisted of a chain of forts, watchtowers, and strong points. It was only udner cover of darkness that the Egyptian Sinuhe with his local knowledge was able to slip through unobserved.

“Six hundred and fifty years later, at th etime of the Exodus from Eghypt, the frotier was also strongly guarded. Moses knew only too well that escape from the country indefiance of Pharaoh’s orders was impossible. The sentries would at once have sounded the alarm and summoned the guards. Any attempt to break through would have been nipped in the bud by sharpshooters and commandos in armored chariots and would have ended in bloodshe. That was the reason why the prophet, knowing the country, chose another, quite unusual route. Moses led the children of Israel southward, as far as the Red Sea, where there was no longer any wall.”

Now back to page 56 of “The Bible As History,” by Werner Keller:

“If we look at a globe of the world, alestine is only a tiny spot onth earth’s surface, a narrow streak. It is possible to drive comfotablhy inm a single day round the borders of the old kingdom of Israel: 150 miles from North to South, 25 miles across at its narrowest point, 9,500 square miles in all, its size was about that of the island of Sicily. Only for a few decades in its turbulent history was it any bigger. Under its renowned kings David andsolomon its territory reached to the arm of the Red Sea at Ezion-Geber in the south, and far beyond Damascus into Syria on the north. The present state of Israel with its 8000 square miles is smaller by a fifth than the old kingdom.

“...Traversed by hills and mountain chains whose summits rose to over 3000 feet, surrounded in the south and east by scrub and desert, in the north by the mountains of Lebanon and Hermon, in the west by a flat coast with no natural harbors, it lay like a...island betsween the great kingdoms on the Nile and the Euphrates, on the frontier between two continents. East of the Nile delta, Africa stops. After a desolate stretch of 100 miles of desert Asia begins, and at its threshold lies Palestine.

“When in the course of its eventful history it was constantly being dragged into the affairs of the wider world, it had its position to think for it. Canaan is the link between Egypt and Asia. The most imortant trade route of the ancient world passs through this country. Merchants and caravans, MIGRATORY TRIBES AND PEOPLES, followed this road, which the armies of the great conquerors were later to make use of. Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans, one after another, made the land and its people the plaything of their economic, strategic, and political concerns.

“It was in the interests of trade that the giant on the Nile in the third millennium B.C., was the first great power to stretch out its tentacles toward Canaan.

“We brought 40 ships, laden with cedar trunks, We built ships of cedarwood-one ‘Pride of Two Lands,’ a ship of 150 feet; and of meru wood, two ships 150 feet long. We made the doors of the king’s palce of cedarwood.’ That is the substance of the world’s oldest business record from a timber importer about 2700 B.C. The details of this cargo of timber in the reign of Pharaoh Snefru are scrate\ched on a tablet of hard black diorite which is carefully preserved in the museum at Palermo. Dense wood form its cedars and meru, a kind of conifer, was just what the Pharaohs needed for their building schemes.

“Five hundredyears, before Abraham’s day there was a flourishing import and export trade on the Canaanite coast. Egypt exchanged gold and spices from Nubia, copper and turquoise from the mines at Sinai, linen and ivory, for silver from the Taurus, leather goods from Byblos, painted vases from Crete. In the great Phoenician dyeworks well-to-do Egyptians had their robes dyed purpoe. For their society women they bought a wonderful lapis lazuli blue; eyelids dyed blue were all the rage, and stibium, a cosmetic which was highly thought of by the ladies for touching up their eyelashes.

“In the seaports of Ugari (now Ras Shamra) and Tyre there were Egyptian consuls; the coastal fortress of Byblos became an Egyptian colony; monuments were erected to the Pharaohs, and Phenician princes adopted Egyptian names.”

BIBLICAL AND SECULAR HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY:

There are very serious problems with Biblical and secular historical chronological dating. Most Biblical chronological dating is based upon James Ussher’s work. Most Egyptian historical chronogkical dating is based on a work by Manetho, and we get it second hand. In our opinion, we prefer to use Adam Rutherford’s work in his four books entitled “Pyramidology.” We cite three sones: (1) Rutherford establishes Adam at 5407 B.C., which coincides with the book of “Adam and Eve,” chapter 3 verses 6 and 16 in “The Lost “Books of The Bible and The Forgotten Books of Eden.” (2) Rutherford establishes 2623 B.C., for the beginning of the work on the Great Pyramid which is ver near. (3) “Peleg” when “the earth” was “divided,” Genesis 10:25. It was the Great Pyramid which divided the earth. The Great Pyramid was located in the very center of the earth, thus dividing equally the land mass of the world, east and west, and also, north and south.

400 YEAR EGYPTIAN BLACKOUT OF THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL:

Oddly enough, there are no Eghyptian written records of the Israelites ever being in Egypt, free or in bondage (with the exeption of possibly one item). There is almot a total 400 year blackout of this history on Egypt’s part. For this niformation, we will quote “The Bible as History in Pictures,” by Werner Keller, page 58:

“If it seems surprising that this success story is given not even the barest mention in the otherwise meticulously accurate Eghyptian records; at last so far as we possess them, we may put it down to the special circumstances of the period in which Joseph in all probability lived.”

Again, in “The Bible As History,” by Werner Keller, page 86:

“On the debit side, there was not the slightst trace of Israel’s sojourn in “Egypt apart from the bible itself. Historians and professors of theology alike spoke of the ‘Legend of Joseph.’ Egypt was just the kind of country from which one might hope for, and even expect, contemporary documentation about the events recorded in the Bible.”

The one lone record we could find, other than the Bible, giving evidence to Israel’s sojourn in Egypt was in “Archæology And The Bible,” by George A. Barton, page 37:

“Merneptah in the fifth year of his reign set up a nhymn of victory on a pillar in a temple erected by his father, Ramses II. This hymn discovered by Petrie in 1896 IS FAMOUS AS THE ONLY WRITING OUTSIDE OF THE BIBLE THAT MENTIONS ISRAEL BY NAME. A part of it sis translated in Part II, p. 331, where its bearing on Exodus is discussed.” (See Fig. 15)

In the back of his book, Barton displays Plate 6, Fig. 15, which is a pictorial representaton of “The ‘Israel’ Inscription Of Merneptah,” the only known Egyptian evidence of Israel’s sojourn among them.

According to “The Bible as History in Pictures,” by Werner Keller, page 130, these are the words of the “Israel-stela”:

“In Egypt there is great rejoicing, Her cities shout for joy...All men speak of Merneptah;s conquest...The princes are prostrate and cry; Peace! The vanquished are laid low...Libya is devastated, the Hittites are pacified. Canaan is conquered and all her wickedness. Askelon is captive, Gezer is fallen, Yenoam is no more, Israel is ravaaged and has no offspring. Palestine is widowed...’

“This monument of Pharaoh Merneptah has often been called the ‘Israel-stela’ since it is so far the only contemorary Egyptian document containing the name of the Israelite people. The relief above the inscription is divided into almost identical scenes. On one side, in the center, the god Amon stands under the inged sun-disk. He is giving Merneptah the sickle-sword with his right hand and holding the sceptre of the gods inh his left. The pharaoh wears the decorative war-helmet, and abovr him hovers the sun-disk with pendant heraldic vipers. With one hand he grasps the sword offered to him by the god Amon, with the other he holds the crock. Behind Merneptahy, on the right of the picture, stands the falcon-headed god Horus, while on the left is Mut, wife of Amon and goddess of Thebes. Horus and Mut both have one hand raised in greeting, in the other hand they hold a notched stick...”

There is more information concering the ‘Israel Stele’ in the book “Dictionary of biblical Archaeology,” by .M. Blaiklock and R. K. Harrison, pages 254-255:

“...The text itself comprised of twenty-eight lines in which the pharaoh boasts of his triumph over the lydians and other foreigners. This monument attracted wide attention because Israel is mentioned in the last section, this being one of the rare references to Israel in ancient nonbiblical documents. Me[r]neptah’s victory over the enemies to the north are described in normative poetic expression for such commemorative hymns, His reference to Israel is as follows: ‘Israel is laid waste, his seed is not; Hurru is become a widow for Egypt.’ THE REFERENCE TO HURRU IS RELATED TO THE HURRIANS, OR THE BIBLICAL HORITES.

“For Bible students the inscription is extremely importatn. First, it is as offical recognition of a people called Israel in extra-biblical documents and inthe earliest mention of Israel known to us in such literature. The words ‘his seed is not’ are a conventional phrase applicable to any defeated or plundered people. It should not, therefore, be applied to the slaying of male children of the Israelites by the Egyptians, as some writers have suggested. Similar expressions are found at least five times referring to other people.

“In contrast with the other enemies, preceded by the determinative for ‘nation,’ the word Israel is designated as a ‘people.’ The fact that such a d eteminative was used preceding the name Israel might indicate that from an Egyptian viewpoint they were considered a people not yet permanently resident in th epolitical (national) sense of the term...”

At this time, it would be appropriate for every White Israelite to thank Yahweh for the fact that there is at lest one monument out of ancient Egypt (though not respectful) which recognizes our heritage!

If we don’t understand the full story of Egypt, and the Phoenicians, we cannot understand the entire story of Jacob-Israel, let alone Esau!

Thus far we have introduced the subject of the Phoenicians. We introduced the subjet of the old “Princes’ Wall” in Egypt and the Egyptian story of Sinuhe. We continued with the 400 year blackout of the History of Israel in Egypt, and that there is only one known Egyptian written record of Israel ever being there.

However, wse really need to go back and make come comments concering each. Willis Mason West, in is book “Early Progress,” pages 55-57 makes the statement:

“Long before 1000 B.C., they (the Phoenicians) had far outrun Egypt and Babylon in trade.”

This comment may be misleading. When wwe consider it was the descendants of Shem who originally occupied the Indus Valley, moved on to Egypt and setup a thriving civilizaton there. From Egypt, these Shemites moved on to the area known as Phoenicia. West’s statement may be correct in a sense, but more clarification is needed.

West also comments about the Phoenicians:

“Sometimes the boatmen used also a square sail, but only to run before the wind. (It was many hundreds of years before sailor learned to ‘tack.’)”

We checked out the art of sailign in the Wold Book Encyclopedia, and we fond that evey maneuver in sailign could be managed with a single sail. There is no way anyone coud row a boat for hundreds of mils by rowing only with oars. We can see where oars wee necessary at particulr times, but not for th elong sailig runs.

Some of the ships in those days were 150 feet long. Not only did the sailors in ancient timesuse th wind, but they also used the water currents to assist in their progress on the way to their destinations. We are pointing this out because we want you to knwo we are not 100% in agreement with all of our quoting from various reference materials.

At the same time, we try to use the best references we can find. Also the assertion in West’s article implying that the Phoenicians “spread civilization that others had created” comes form not understanding who they were. As West speaks of the Phoenicians using ?cuneiform script” in 1600 B.C., and advancing to a true alphabet by 1100 B.C., he is syaing a great deal, but 1100 B.C., is a bit late. Did Moses and the Judges before 1100 B.C., write in cuneiform? We don’t think so! Hecataeus interviewed his Canaanite “Phoenicians” about 610 B.C. Herodotus was thee about 455 B.C. All of these accoutns, including John Clark Ridpath’s article on the Phoenicans, are all late.

Surely there were at least some Israelites in Tyre still in Herodotus’ time, but would they have understood who they were, over 200 years after the deportations? Aside from thee people, the Assyrians had ;imported about 18 different races (depending on how you count them) into “Phoenicia’ and neighboring Samaria, some of them surely being from regions near the Persian Gulf.

We have also mentioned the discrepancies in the chronologies of the Bible and history. Adam Rutherford, in his four volume work, “Pyramidology, vol. 3, p. 702 makes the following remark concerning chronology (it is a side note attached to a chart of dates from Adam until the Exodus):

“Note on Patriarchal Periods. A careful examination of the most ancient manuscripts and version of Genesis revelas the unreliability fo the Massoretic system of chronolgy, in regard to the earliest imes. Archaeological research has also proved that the Massoretic figures (as appearing in the A.V.) Are completly untenable prior to the time of Abraham. In this Table, the chronology of the period from Adam to Abraham is based on the Septuagint system, which for the epoch subsequent to the Flood, is confirmed by the Samaritan Hebrew text and in agreement with archaeology.”

You are probably wondering what the preceding has to do with Edom. We are trying to establish the background history during Esau’s lifetime to ascertain what things were like during his age. We are sure we’ll find things were entirely different than we ever imagined when we finally get to his story. And is far different that the false Judeo-Christian clergy teaches.

A PLACE CALLED “MARI”

One of the places we should take into consideration is a place called “Mari.” We will quote from”The Thompson Chain-Refeence Bible, 1964© edition, in the “Archaeological Supplement,” page 345, item 4393 (readings of late editions vary slightly):

Mari was an important ancient city on the middle Euphrates which is now known as Tell Hariri. The location is strategic in that it is the halfway city between Carchemish and Babylon.

“Professor Andre Parrot began excavation on the 300-acre mound in 1933, and during his many campaigns uncovered a ealth of material which depicts life as it was lived in Patriarchal times. He uncovered the royal palace of imri-lim, King of Mari, which covered seven acres, and contained more than 250 rooms and courts, in addition to the great audience room, administrative offices, and quarters for visiting officials from othe lands. Two of the rooms were school rooms where youngsters were taught reding, writing and arithmetic in order to train them for life, and especially to become future ‘scribes.’ in the center of the palace was the king’s private chapel, which had three open courts, the innermost of which was 76 feet long, with walls 30 feet high. In this chapel was the statue of Ishtar, th egoddess of fertility. Water flowed through the statue and out of a vase hich she held in her hand. This was the same goddess whom the Hetrews called ‘Ashtaroth,’‘the goddess of the Sidonians.’ (2 Kings 11:33)

“In the royal archives of the king’s palace the excavators discovered more than 20,000 tablets. Some of these were letters to the king from district officers of the state of Mari. Othes were diplomatic letters from princes and rulers throughout Mesopotamia and Syria. There were letters from Hammurabi, King of Babylon, to whom Mari fell during the 32^nd year of zimri-lim’s reign. In the district officials’ letters frequent reference was made to the cities of HARAN, NAHOR, SERUG, PELEG, and the ‘mound of TERAH’ places mentioned in the Old Testment. The personal names of REU, TERAH, NAHOR, ABRAHAM, ISAAC, JACOB, JOSEPH BENJAMIN and DAVID are so common in these letters that Dr. Albright has said:

‘ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB no longer seem isolated figures, much less reflections of late Israelite history; they now appear as true children of their age, bearing the same names, moving about over the same territory, visiting the same town (especially HARRAN and NAHOR), practicing the same customs as their contemporaries.’”

THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS FIND:

Unger’s bible Dictionary expresses the importance of this find on page 695:

“The Mari Letters have helped to date Hammurabi (1728-1626 B.C.), thus settling a very difficutl point in Biblical chronology. In fact, the Mari documents have been a major discovery and have completely revised current knowledge of history, linguistics and historical backgound at a period around 1700 B.C.”

MARI’S GENERAL HISTORY:

From “The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible,” vol. 4, p. 74, we read the following:

“History. The earliet known example of a king claiming to have conqueered Mari is Eannatum of Lagash (2500 B.C.). Around 2350 B.C., Sargon the Great of Akkad made the same claim. During the 3^rd dynasty of Ur (2113-2006 B.C.) Mari was ruled by governors (sakkanakku) of the kings of Ur. But 2017 Ishbi-Erra, who hailed form Mari and was an official of the Ibbi-“Sin, ing of Ur (2020-2006), seized control of the city of Isin, when it was cut off from ur by rampaging Amorites. When Ur fell in 2006 B.C., Ishbi-Erra of Isin and Naplanum of Larsa became th eleading powers in Babylon. Yakhdun-Lim, king of Khana (1830-1800 B.C.) Conquered the city of Mari and incorporated it in his realm. But not long thereafter he was defeated by king Shamshi-Adad I of Assyria (1814-1782 B.C.) In 1800 B.C., Yakhdun-Lim lost his life in a palace revolution perhaps instigated by Shamshi-Adad, and his on Zimri-Lim fled to Syria. Four years later Shamshi-Adad installed his son Yasmakh-Adad as vice-king of Mari (1796-1780 B.C.) When Shamshi-Adad died (1782 B.C.), Zimri-Lim secured the assistance of Ibal-pi-El II of Eshnunna (1790-1761 B.C.) And the king of Aleppo to drive Yasmakh-Adad from the throne of Mari. After an independent rule of nineteen years (1779-1761), Zimri-Lim was reduced to the status of a vassal king or governor of the city, when Hammurabi of Babylon conquered Mari in 1761 B.C. As a vassal of Hammurabi Zimri-Lim continued to rule Mari until the Kassites destroyed the city in 1742.B.C.”

A yave probably noticed, many of these names are probably new and strange to you. With the net reference the mention of the Kassites will be used helpign to put some fo the pieces of the puzzle together. We will now quote from “Archaeology And The Bible,” by George A. Barton, pages 109-110:

“The Canaanites. Between 1800 and 1750 B.C., a migration ocurred which greatly disrupted all western Asia. There moved into Babylonia from the east a people called KASSITES. They conquered Babylonia and established a dynasty which reign for 576 years. Coincident with this movement into Babylonia there was a migration across the whole of Asia to the westward, which caused an invasiton of Egypt and the stablishment of the Hyksos dynasties there.

“As pointed out previously, it is possble that this movement, IN SO FAR AS THE LEADERSHIP OF THE INVASION OF EGYPT WAS CONCENED, WAS HITTITE. In any event, however, many Semites were involved in it, as the Semitic names in the Egyptian Delta at this time prove. IT IS CUSTOMARY TO ASSUME THAT IT WAS IN CONNECTON WITH THIS MIGRATION THAT THE CANAANITES CAME INTO PALESTINE.

“This cannot, in the present state of our knowledge, be clearly roved, but such evidence as we have points in this direction. There began at this time a new period of culture at Gezer, which is quite distinguishable from that which had preceded. This indicates the coming of new influences. Moreover, THERE WAS APPARENTLY AN AUGMENTATION OF THE POPULATION OF PALESTINE AT THIS TIME. New cities were formed at Tell el-Hesy and Tel es-Safi, and elsewhere. We thus feel sure that there was an increase of population and, when next our written souces reveal to us the location of the nations, THE CANAANITES WERE DWELLING IN PHOENICIA. The Egyptian scribes of a later time called the entire westernpart of Syria and Palestine ‘The Canaan.’

“Probably, therefore, the Canaanites ettled along the sea coast. We, therefore, infer that they came into this region at this time. With the ocming of an increased population, the Amorites appear to have been in part subjugated and ABSORBED, and in part forced into narrowe limits. A powerful group of them maintained their integrity in the region afterward occupied by the tribe of Asher and in the valley between the Lebanon and anti-Lebanonmountains, where they afterward formed a kingdom. Another group of them survived to the east of th eJordan, where they maintained a kingdom until overthrown by the Hebrews.”

The Shepherd Kings

In an article publised by Destiny Magazine, October 1962, entitled “Enoch’s Mission and Shem’s Responsibility” (pages 201-204 in the 1962 yearbook), Howard B. Rand quotes Manetho as saying that the “Hyksos” were “shepherd kings.” Yet, at the same time, his article places the “shepherd kings” with Pharaoh Cheops of the 4^th Dynasty several hundreds of years before.

We are quite surprised that Rand didn’t recognize this discrepancy before he wrote the articl. As the Hyksos were only in Egypt for a little ove a hundred years in the reigns of Kamose at the end of the 17^th Dynasty and Amosis at the beginning of the 18^th Dynasty, thee is no way the Hyksos could be the same people as the “shepherd kings” at the time of Cheops. Outside of this disparity, the rest of the article is outstanding in bringing many interesting facts into perspective from which we will not quote excerpts:

“During the construction of the Great Pyramid in Egypt, the records indicate that the Egyptian government was in opposition to the idolatrous worship that had been established in the land. Cheops, the Pharaoh ruling at taht time, was accused by the idolatrous worshipers of being very arrogant toward the gods, having shut up their temples and having compelled the riests to labor

“THE SHEPHERD KINGS. Historical fragments set forth the fact that at this time there was a notable stranger in Egypt who remained at the site of the Great Pyramid. The priests whom Herodotus the historian counsulted regarding the earlier history of Egypt described this stranger as a shepherd to whom, rather than to Cheops, the Egyptians attributed the building of the Great Pyramid.

“Cheops apparently furnished the sit, the workmen and the materials. The record refers to this stranger as a keeper of sheep and he is called ‘Philition’ or ‘Philitis’...

“When the people of Israel left Egypt and were moving through the wilderness, in order to bolster their morale, they were told of a much earlier people who, in like manner, had been led out of Egypt. They were alled Caphtorims who ame out of Caphtor, to whom Moses referred in Deuteronomy 2:23, See also Genesis 10:14.

“This place called Caphtor was the very region in Egypt where today the Great yramid stands. The Lord, through the Prophet Amos, refers to the people as Philistines whom He brought up from Caphtor (Amos 9:7). Theefore, we learn from the historian Herodotus (confirmed in the Scripture) of Philistines (Caphtorims) once living in the neighborhood of the Great Pyramid, who wee the object of Divine favor and who were led out of Egypt before the Israelites left the land.

“These were not the philistines of the time of the judges and David, but a much earlie people who feared and reverenced the true God...Coming to Palestine from the Nile Delta, they were known in Wgypt as ‘The Shepherd Kings.’

“...after the Deluge, Shem became the first of the shepherd kings who reigned in Egypt. He was held inj higheest honor by the people in that land for having delivered them from the Cushite yoke... Thus, when the idolatrous priests were again in the ascendancy, eveything possible was don to blacken Shem’s memory.

“THE REFORMS OF SHEM. During the reign of the sheherd King Set, or Shem,and his immediate successors, the fomplete overthrow of the Egyptian gods occurred; their temples were demolished and idolatry in any form was forbidden throuout the land...This was mainly the work of Shem, the Shepherd King was also Priest of the Most High God, in his conflict with the gross idolatry of ‘Egypt. The heathen temples were liteally smashed to pieces...

“Manetho says tht the shepherds were finally prevailed upon to leave Egypt, wheich they did without molestation, and went to Judea where they built the city of Jerusalem. Josephus, the Jewish (Judean) historian, alls these shepherds ‘our ancestors,’ which is definitely the case if Shem was the first and most powerful Shepherd King of Egypt...”

We doubt very much whether the Hyksos were ever really called “shepherd kings.” It appears in the Hyksos we have some shepherd kings who were not shepherd kings, and in the Caphtorims some Philistines who were not Philistines. We can now see the important fact that the pharaoh related to Assenath was a Shemite. Understanding this is to understand the Bible.

Now we will be getting into areas not usually encountered ij the average study of Sripture. Asome of these things may seem strange and quite different than you ever dreamed they might have been. We believe that once we learn something of these seemingly biarre circumstances it will add to our understanding of Yahweh’s Word considerably. As usual these matters are altogether diffeent than we wer ever taught they were.

We have found out thee were two diffeent pharaohs ruling in Egypt at the same time during the Hyksos period, and that the pharaoh at Thebes was subservient to the Hyksos. Then, too, we learned that Joseph was probably sold tothe autoority at Thebes rather than the Hyksos. In additino,we found out that, through Joseph saving the Egyptians from starvation, the sons of Jacob were given Egypt’s very best land. We detemined, also, there were two seven-year famines in Egypt’s history. Further, we learned that Joseph placed a 20% income tax on some of the people where it was legal to do so. In our injvestigation,we discovered it was the paharaoh that gave Joseph his wife; intimating he, the pharaoh, was Shemitic in stock. Then we explored the subject of Shepherd Kings, which we will continue at this time.

Walking step by step through israel’s sojourn in Egypt from Joseph until Joshua:

In this walk, we are going to try to thoroughly comprehend the true nature of the events during this era of time. Yahweh had good reson for placing Israel in Egypt, and we will try to understand the reason for such a stay. It is our opinion that Yahweh placed Israel in Egyt so thatEgypt might fight off many of the enemies Israel would be facing later on; so that they could gain their strength. It is now time to prepare ourselves with more facts concerning these things.

Because the subject of the Shepherd Kings is of such great magnitude in importance we must prioritize our time to delve into it. It may come as a surprise to many, the symbol of the Shepherd Kings is the Sphinx and the first Shepherd King was Adam, and the priesthood was called the Order of Melchizedek. Howard B. Rand, in Destiny Magazine, October, 1962 wrote an article “Enoch’s mission and Shem’s Responsibility” (1962 Destiny yearbook pages 201-204) which we will now quote in part:

“Order Of Melchizeded. When Shem[‘s]... followers, came out of Egypt, they founded at Jerusaelm the city destined to become the City of David and also the capital of the Kingdom of Yahweh when Yeashua, who is of the Order of Melchizedek... (we will be using the Tetragrammaton).

“The priestly Order of Melchizedek began with

Adam and the Preafhers of Righteousness from Adam to Noah were of this Order. Noah is recorded as the eighth Preacher of Righteousness in 2 Peter 2:5. The fifth chapter of Genesis begins, ‘This is the book of the generations of Adam,” AND NO ONE OF THE LINE OF CAIN IS RECORDED THERE. As stated in Primogenesis.

“Noah was was the tenth in generation. The reason he was but the eighth in priestly line was because Enoch was translated before his father died and did not come to the priestly office. (Genesis 5:24) Methuselah, the son of Enoch, took the office directly from his grandfather Jared, the father of Enoch. Methuselah, in turn, outlived his son Lamech, so the office passed directly to his grandson, Noah, the son of Lamech. (Genesis 5:27) Noah, therefore, became the eighth Preacher of Righteousness, though the tenth in generation, because these two, Enoch and Lamech, never succeeded to the priestly office.’ (Primogenesis, p. 44)

“In this line of Preachers of Righteousness, Shem, Noah’s son, became the ninth. As stated in Primogenesis: ‘The Order of Melchizedek, in its earthly representation, began with A”dam as the first Preacher of Righteousness. Noah was the eighth and Shem the ninth...’So also Yeashua glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee. As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizeded.’ (Hebrews 5:5-6)

“In His ministry, He was a Prophet; in His atonement, He was a Priest. When He returns, He is to be King. Thus, in the order of Melchizedek, He is Prophet, Priest and King.’ (Primogenesis, pp. 66-67)

“Order of Master Shepherds. The Bible also records a line of master shepherds beginning with these Preachers of Righteousness, who wore the shepherd’s garb as the insignia of office. From Abraham to John the Baptist, in each generationthee were those who were members of this ancient and honorable Order. Then Yeashua associated Himself with the offie, becoming the Grand Master of the Order of Master Shepherds: ‘I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.’ (John 10:14-15)

“Ninth Preacher of Righteousness. It is fitting, therefore, that Shem, who was the ninth Preacher of Righteousness and also a member of the Order of Master Shepherds, was entrusted with the construction of the Great Pyramid at Gizen in Egypt...Only a building that is pyramidal in shape is completed by placing a capstone in position...

“A Sign and Witness. Many generations after Enoch’s day the Prophet Isaiah was constrained to write: ‘In that day shall there be an altar to Yahweh in the midst of the Land of Egypt,a nd a pillar at the border thereof to Yahweh. And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto Yahweh of Hosts in the land of Egypt.’ (Isaiah 19:19-20) Undoubtedly Isaiah was aware that this was the Pillar of Enoch; that to Enoch its design was committed and on Shem the responsibility its design was committed and on Shem the responsibility was laid to buidl this remarkable structure in the land that had harbored the people of Israel for four hundred years and had later sheltered...Yeashua.”

Along the same line of thought, we will now follow up with another article appearing in Destiny Magazine of October, 1955 (Inside front cover), entitled “Shem The Powerful.” Actually, we will be quoting a quotaton which the article cites from a book “The Worship of the Dead or The Origin and Nature of Pagan Idolatry,” by a Colonel J. Garnier:

“Sphinxes wer the particular form of sculpture associated with the shepherd kings, and were constructed in honor of Set (an Egyptian name given to Shem), while the Great Sphinx seems to be especially associated with the Great Pyramid built by Suphis (another name associated with Shem). As the Tanis Sphinxes (a group of three sphinxes at Tanis, Egypt); are unmistakably the likeness of one particular individual, it seems certain that they represent the features of the first great shepherd king. Set the Powerful (Shem)...

“If, then, these heds are likenesses of the great Sepherd King Set, they reresent the exact features of the antediluvian patriarch Shem, and we behold in them something of the type of primeval man as he first came from the hands of Yahweh...In representing him therefore, as a lion with a human head, there was a certian fitness, and the idea was probably borrowed from the Cherubim, the form which seems to have been generally known...”

There is a total disrepancy of 1486 years between the Masoretic and Septuagint texts. We doubt very much whehter Ussher’s chronology (which is based on the Masoretic text) is orrect. If the oldest living atriarch was the faimly priest-king, Abraham, therefore, probably paid his tithes to Nahor #2, his brother, rather than Shem.

Also, it was found in the Masoretic text that Heber was born before Abraham, and died after hi.this highly unlikely as Heber was Abraham’s great, geat, great, great grandfather. Genesis 11:26-27 tells us that Abraham had two brothers, Nahor and Haran. Inasmuch as Nahor #1 (Abraham’s grandfather) died, and Terah became pagan, the priest-king office was probably left to Nahor #2; Haran having died before Abram and Tera left Ur of the Chaldees. (Genesis 11:28) Therefore, we believe it is possible Nahor #2 may have been Abraham’s Melchizedek. By the priet-kingshi skiping the generation of Terah (breaking the lineal order) might explain why Melchizedek was without lineal descent.

It should be becoming quite clear in our studies on this subject that Joseph and his pharaoh (probably Amosis), Joseph’s wife Asenath and her father were all descendants of Shem. We should also be starting to realize that the Great Sphinx, a little up the road from the Great Pyramid of Gizeh, is emblematially a representation of Adam through Nahor #2, (less Enoch, Lamech and Arphaxad who were outlived by their fathers), and Yeashua the Redeemer-Messiah Himself. And, also, that the Great Pyramid of Gizeh is a monument and emblem of Enoch, predicting Adamic-Israel’s future along with some othe amazing data and revelations. Surelyi, Isaiah was correct when he wrote, Isaiah 19:19-20:

“In that day shall there be an altar to Yahweh in the midst of th eland of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to Yahweh. And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto Yahweh of hosts in the land of Egypt: for they (as the Israelites formerly did) shall cry unto Yahweh because of the oppressors, and he shall send them a savior, and a geat one, and he shll deliver them.”

We believe that the reason the altar and pillar were placed in Egypt is because our coming deliverance will be very similar tot hat experienced in the Exodus, and that the wicked pharaoh of today, like then, is going to “let our people go,” and it will require the death angel to accomplish it.

We have to put first things first. How are the “tares” going to be rooted up unless they are first identified? The good news is; the enemy, the “Jews,” are quickly being identified, no help from, nor thanks to, the one seedliners. There is one common groudn though, among both the one and the Two Seedliners, along with the patriots; we are all crying because of our present day oppression.

Is There Biblical Support?

If all we have read from these excerpts of Destiny Magazine, and if Howard B. Rand is somewhere near being correct, there should be some Biblical evidence that there was a lapse of the Shepherd Kings from Nahor #2 until Yeashua the Messiah. Hebrews 7:12 indicates that, at the first coming of Yeashua, there was a change from the priesthood of Aaron back to the priesthood of Melchizedek. Let’s take a look at it:

“For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.”

From this, we believe we can be resonably sure that Rand was correct in his premise there was a lapse of the Melchizedek priesthood during th edays of the Aaronic priesthood, and that the Levitical law was changed to accommodage a return to it. For further study along this line, it might be advisable to study Hebrews chapters 5, 6 & 7 along with Genesis 14:18 and chater 110 of the book of Psalm, especially verse 4.

Who and What Was Manetho?

Because Destiny Magaine and Rand quote Manetho in their postulations about the Shepherd Kings, we need to learn more about this Egyptian priest. For a brief explanation of this man, we will quote from the “World Scope Encycloedia (1951),” volume 7:

“Manetho...a historian of ancient Egypt, flourished in the reign of Ptolemy Soter, at the beginning of the 3^rd century B.C. He was a priest in Lower Egypt and is the author of two important works, one on the history and the other on the religion of his country. Both books have been lost, but fragments have been preserved by later hsitorians, in cluding Eusebius and Josephus. In the Armenian version of Eusebius is a list of the Egyptian dynasties according to Manetho, the dates of which appear to have been derived from genuine documents, including the sacred books of the Egyptian priests.”

For a more detailed account on Manetho, we will use the “Encyclopædia Britannica,” ninth edition (1894), volume 15, pages 485-486:

“He was instructed in Greek; so Josephus tells us, and the three books of his Α_wπτ_αά composed in that language opened to foreigners the history of Egypt from the mythical period downwards, as it was preserved in the records of the priests. Undoubtedly the book is now known only by lists of fragments preserved by Josephus in his treatise AGAINST APION, by Eusebius in his CHRONICA, and by Syncellus. Syncellus used the work of Eusebius (also known through Jerome and the Armenian version) and lost PENTABIBLON of Africanus.

“Thus the little that was known of Manetho’s history has reached us through A PROCESS OF TRANSCRIPTION AND RETRANSCRIPTION very unfavorable to the correct transmission of the lists of kings and dynasties, to which Josephus alone adds any considerable narrative excerpt. It seems indeed that our AUTHORITIES THEMSELVES USED VEARYING AND PARTLY CORRUPT RECENSIONS OF THE ORIGINAL TEXT, AND THAT DELIBERATE CORRUPTIONS OF THE MANETHONIC TRADITION WERE NOT WANTING apears from the existence of the ‘Book of Sothis’ cited by Syncellus, WHICH WAS UNDOUBTEDLY A SPURIOUS WORK.

“That Manetho himself made honest use of his egytian sources is generally recognized, since the Egyptian monuments have afforded confirmation of many, though by no means all, of his statementss; but how the corrupt and varying data we now have should be used, or whether the Egyptian tradition can be made the basis of a rational chronology of the oldest historical period is doubtful.”

The above quotation should give you some idea of what to expect in Manetho’s writings. The Egyptian pharaohs were so notoriuos for trying to erase the history of the pharaohs before them; that, undboutedly, Manetho may have had a lot of spurious records from which to work. Whether or not he was biased in his own writings cannot be easily ascertained, but what motive would he have had for changing the record 1000 years after the fact? But, whateer conclusion we arrive at, we must realize there are roblems with the data ascribed to him.

Josephs On Manetho. The Works of Josephus has a good amount of comment concerning this Egptian scribe. In “Against Apion,” 1:12. Josephus starts quoting Manetho. He continues quoting him until ‘Against Apion,” 1:16, where he says:

“In the first place, that we (Israel) came out of another country into Egypt; and that withal our deliverance out of it was so ancient in time, as to have preceded the suiege of Troy almost a thousand years; but then, as to those things which Manetho adds, NOT FROM THE EGYTIAN REFORDS, but, as he confesses himself, from some stories of an uncertain original, I will disprove them hereafter particularly, and shall demonastrate that they are NO BETTER THAN INCREDUIBLE FABLES.”

Then Josephus goes on to othe subjects and picks up Manetho again in’Against Apion,” 1:26, where he says:

“And now I will turn my discourse to one of their principal writers, whom I have a little before made use of as a witness to our antiquity; I mean Manetho.”

Then Josephus continues with his criticism of Manetho in “Against Apion,” 2:3. If you don’t already have Josephus in your library, you may want to get a copy, if you already have one you can check these passages which we have pointed out for yourself.

Confusion breeds confusion; Two Hyksos groups:

Apparently, what we have in “Against Apion,” 1:14, is utter confusion as the facts do not entirely concur. In this passage Manetho speaks of

“men of ignoble birth ut of the estern parts, and had boldness enough to make an expedition into our country, and with ease subdued it by force...At length they made one of themselves king (pharaoh)...and made both the uper and lower regions pay tribute...he founded...a city...called Avaris...”

Manetho is confusing two different peoples as being Hyksos when he says,

“This whole nation was styled Hyksos, tht is, Shepherd-Kings, for the first syllable Ηγκ, according to the sacred dialect denotes a King, as is Soς, a shepherd...”

Then Howard B. Rand picks up some of this confusin in his articles, quoted herein, published in Destiny Magazine. These Hyksos were definitely not Israelites as Josephus thinks, for when Jacob and company ame to Egypt, they were but seventy souls, Genesis 46:26. These Israelites were not of “ignoble birth:” they didn’t subdue Egypt by force; they didn’t impose tribute on the uppe and lowe regions; they didn’t set over themselves a king; and they didn’t settle at Avaris.

In “Against Apion,” 1:15, a very critical Manetho is supposed to have said:

“When this people or shepherds were gone out of Egypt to Jerusalem...”

Again in “Againt Spion,” 1:26, Josephus speaks of Manetho, saying:

“...he then ascribes certain fabulous stories to this king, as having in a manner forgotten how he had already related that the departure of the shepherds for Jerusalem had been five hundred and eighteen years before...”

It is apparent that this group of Shepherd Kings were not the Israelites of the Exodus, for it was not until the time of David that the city of Jerusalem was secured from the Jebusites, 1 Chronicles 11:4-7. It is our opinion that this group of Shepherd Kings were the Shemites that settled in Egypt at an earlier time and built the Great Pyramid and continued there as the ruling class and as priests. And, that some of the descendants of Shem later left Egyt for Jerusalem, and Nahor #2 was at that location when Abaham arrived there to pay his tithes to Melchizedek (Nahor #2), priest of salem.

It would appear, it is a necessity to separate the early Shepherd Kings of Shem in Egypt from the later Hyksos (a non-Israel group) and the Israelites themselves. You probably can now see why, while we agree with much of the material published in Destiny Magazine about the Shephed Kings. We disagree to some degree with Howard B. Rand and company.

The Life of Joseph

While Jacob had twelve sons by two wives and two concubines, Joseph was the firsborn son toJacob by Rachel, his favorite wife. This is the reason Jacob loved Joseph more than any of the others. As you will remember, while in Paddan-aram, Jacob saw and loved Rachel, and made an arrangement to work seven years (to the seventh year) in Laban’s hire for her hand in marriage. (Genesis 29:17-18)

“Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favored. And Jacob loved Rachel and siad, I willserve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.”

No doubt, this extra six years of waiting for Rachel only increased Jacob’s love for her and, in turn, nurtured the great love for the first son she bore to him. Before Rachel, Laban had given Leah, her elder sister, to Jacob, insisting custom demanded the oldest daughter be married first.

Therefore, jacob worked an additional six years for Rachel. Actually, in Jacobs mind, he worked twelve years to receive Rachel. Can you imagine a man counting down the days on a clendar for six years until the great day for the wsedding and then doing it a second time?

Actually Leban deceived Jacob, the whole story is in Genesis 29:16‑25:

“And Laban had two daughters: the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favoured. And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter. And Laban said, It is better that I give her to thee, than that I should give her to another man: abide with me. And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her. And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her. And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast. And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her. And Laban gave unto his daughter Leah Zilpah his maid for an handmaid. And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me?”

After fourteen years of servitude to Laban for Rachel, how disappointed Jacob must have been when she didn’t conceive as Leah had done. Can you imagine how thrilled Jacob was when, finally after much difficulty, Rachel did finally give birth to Joseph? Can you imagine how overwhelmingly grief-stricken Jacob must have been when Rachel died giving birth to a second son, Benjamin Maybe now we can begin to see Jacob’s motive for making Joseph a coat of many colors. As his grief grew, so did his partiality for Rachel’s children, Genesis 37:3:

“Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children because he WAS the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of MANY colors.”

One day, reaching the age of seventeen, his father sent him to Shechem to dheck on the well-being of his brothers and to report to him any misconduct on their part. In the meantime, they had gone to Dothan where Joseph finally found them. As the brothes saw hi appraching, they plotted to kill the snitcher-dreamer.

Reuben, therefore, prevailed on his brothers to spare Joseph by casting him into a pit instead of taking his life, thinking to return and rescue him and rejoin him safely to his father. While Reuben was away, his brothes observed a caravan of Arabian merchants, who were transporting sices and aromatic gums of India to the well-known and much-frequented market of Egypt.

At the suggestion of Judah, showing his natural talent of leadership, they decided to sell Joseph as a slave to the approaching Ishmaelites, who later took him into Egypt. The brothers then took the beautiful foat which his father had made for him and dipped it into some goats blood, returning to their father with the story that a wild animal had killed him. Their intention was to punish their father as well as oseph for spying on them.

Joseph proved to be a very trustworthy worker and was given an authoritative position to match his abilities. While in Potiphar’s household, Potiphar’s wife was drawn to Joseph’s manly attractiveness. The Hebrew race has always been eye-catching for their personal beauty, of which Joseph seems to have had more than his ordinary share.

No doubt an attribute of his mother. She thus moved very slyly to seduce him. It became an obsesson for her to throw herself at him daily. One day, Joseph found himself fighting heer unchaste desiress as she literally snatched his garmet from his body as he was hastily leaving he presence. Allusion to this incident is found in the book “Cleopatra’s Needles,” page 18, where it says:

“Another Arab writer, Hasan ibn Ibrâhîm, says theywere i the ‘temple of the Sun where Zulêkhâ tore Joseph’s shirt in pieces’ (quoted by Yâkût), but she is the only woman whom the “Arabs associate with the building.”

Joseph, in consequence, gained favor with the keeper of the prison to such a degree that most everthing was put under his charge. While there, he became known for interpreting dreams. Joseph not only had the ability to interpret his own dreams, but explained the meanings of the dreams of others.

Whereupon, Joseph inquired why they were so down and out. Each of them repled to Joseph they had had a very unsetting dream and had no idea the meaning thereof. Joseph then interpreted each man’s dream accordingly as Yahweh showed him. In three days, the butler was to be returned to his station, but the baker was to be hanged. Upon interpreting the butler’s dream, Joseph requested of him to plead his case before Pharaoh, but being soon restored he remembered not.

After two years, the Pharaoh himself dreamed two very distressing dreams of his own. These two dreams were so troubling and upsetting to him that he called for all his magicins and wise men in all of his domain to go through their hocus-pocus and reveal the meaning of them to him, but they could not. Upon the inability of the magiians to interpret Pharaoh’s dreams, the chief butler remembered Joseph’s skill and advised the pharaoh that Joseph was still in prison.

Joseph informed Pharaoh his dreams were a foreboding of an approaching seven years of famine after a period of seven years of plenty. Joseph then, in order to abate the evils of starvation, recommended that Pharaoh choose some discreet and wise man, along with officers, to set in full power and administe reparations for the coming hardship. Pharaoh was so favorably impressed, he recognized Joseph as Yahweh’s man. Joseph was now 30 years old; the same age as Yeashua would be when He started His ministry.

Pharaoh then gave Joseph a ring on his finger, a chain around his neck and the finest of clothing, along with a chariot. But, the greatest of all gifts Pharaoh preented to joseph during the seven years of abundance was the beautiful Shemitic Asenath, who bore him Manasseh and Ephraim. This seven years of abundance afforded Joseph opportunity to carry out such plans as to secure ample provisions against the seven years of nned. When the famine finally arrived, it found the people prepared. But not so with his father Jacob and brothers in Canaan.

This is a research effort into areas not generally covered by the average type of Bible study. When we really take the time to explore these various things, they are usually quite different than we ever imagined. We have to approach these topics like a detective in order to dig out all the assorted details.

There are two objectives in this study; 1). To set the historical stage so we can better understand the foundation of the subject, and 2). To place Egyptian and Biblical history side by side for comparison. You remember the story about Joseph and how his brothers sold him into slavery because of their jeloussy; and then later they had come to Egypt to buy grain, and how he recognized his brothers, but his brothers didn’t recognize him; how he accused them of being spies; how he kept them under guard for three days; how he relaeased them to return home with the wanted provisions; how each man’s money was placed in his sack, and how he kept Simeon as hostage until they returned again with Benjamin.

When we read the story of Joseph, without knowing that we the White Peoples of the earth are the True Israelites, it is a very poignant and touching story which happened to some remote family who lived back in ancient times. But, once the blinders have been removed from our eyes, that, in fact, we are the true Israelites, it becomes a very enrapturing story of our own herediary family tree. Therefore, our personal interests are increaded a thousand-fold. Don’y you fee sorry for the many White Israelites who do not understand this?

While keeping Simeon as surety, Joseph permitted his brothers to return to their father, for the need was great in Canaan. Jacob hand many flocks along with silver and gold, but his fields gave him no grain, and the cattle had little green pasture.

The threat of starvation was very real and imposing. Joseph had no alternative but to keep one ofthe brothers as hostage, for, if he had not, he may have never had the opportunity to see his family again. While returning to Canaan, the brothers didn’t know that Joseph had understood what they were saying when they discussed in his presence about their selling him into slavery. The brothers spoke in their own language, not knowing Joseph understood, that this whole thing had come upon them because of the wrong they had done to their brother Joseph approximately twenty-three years preciously.

The reason they didn’t recognize Joseph was because he had gown up to be a man, was dressed as an Egyptian prince and was seated on a throne. Joseph was now nearly forty years old. Joseph, upon seeing his brothers for the first time in almost twenty-three years, was curious whether or not the brothers still carried their old hatred for him.

How his heart was moved to tears when he overheard the brother’s conversation lamenting gheir former behavior. However, Joseph resolved to be very sharp and stern with them; not because he didn’t love them,b ut because he needed to see how much they may have changed their attitude from their former selfish, cruel and wicked ways he remembered.

How impressed Joseph must have been when he saw his brothers humbly bowed before him. Surely, at this time, Joseph must have remembered the dream he had had when still a boy of his brother’s sheaves bending down around his sheaf.

In returning to their father in Canaan, how uneasy the brothers must have been leaving Simeon behind and knowing they were being forced to return again with Benjamin, (the second son born by Jacob’s favorite wife, Rachel). They surely must have realized how grieved their father would be over the prospect of possibly of losing the only remaining son born by her.

To further the brother’s anxieties, little did they know until they stopped along the way to eat, rest and feed their donkeys, one of the men’s money had been restored in his sack. Finding the money, the brothers were afraid to return to the very stern ruler they had met in Egypt, and also afraid to face their father over the matter. To complicate the situation, upon arriving home, they vound every man’s money had been returned in their saceks. Arriving at home, being fearful, the brothers had to face their father Jacob with all these things. The brothers spoke of returning again to Egypt and taking Benjamin, but Jacob replied in Genesis 42:36:

“...Me have ye bereaved of my children: Joseph is not, and Simeon is not, and ye will take Benjamin away: all these things are against me.”

Whereupon Reuben replies:

“Here are my own two sons. If I do not return with Benjamin, you may kill them if you wish.”

But Jacob replied to Reuben:

“...My son shall not go down with you; for his brother is dead, and he is left alone: if mischief befall him by the way in which ye go, then shall ye bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave.”

The food which the brothers had brougnt from Egypt was soon used up, for Jacob had a large family. By this time each of his sons had married and, along with their wives, there were many grandchildren; making a total of sixty-six, not including the servants which waited on them plus the men who cared for the flocks. You can see there was quite a camp around Jacob’s tent. It was not long before the food su0pply they had gotten from Egypt became dangerously low, and Jacob had no alternative but to send the brothers back once again to purchase more.

At this point Judah, the one who years before had urged the brothers to sell Joseph to the Ishmaelites, reminded Jacob it would be of little use in going back to Egypt without Benjamin, for the man who ruled there said that upon their return without him, they would not be able to gain his audience. On this proposal, Jacob chided Judah for even mentioning to the Egyptian ruler they had a younger brother.

The rest of the brothers replied to Jacob, the questions were asked in such a precise way the answers couldn’t be avoided, and how could they have known he woul demand them to bring their younger brother. Benjamin? Judah then told Jacob, if he would allow him to take Benjamin with them, he would bring him home safely, and if he didn’t return him as he said, to let him bear the guilt forever.

Judah then reminded Jacob that ti was imperative that they return to Egypt with Benjamin, or the whole family would die of starvation. In fact, Judah and his brothers told Jacob: if they were permitted to take Benjamin along, they would go, but if they couldn’t take Benjamin, they would not go. Finally, with much misgiving, Jacob agreed to let Benajmin go with the brothers to Egypt to buy more food.

Jacob told the brothers, if they must go, then they must, but while you are going, take the Egyptian ruler some of our choicest fruit; some honey; some spices; some myrrh, some nuts and almonds. While you are at it, take the man double the money for the last food in case he might think we possibly may have stolen it. Then Genesis 43:15 states:

And the men took that present, and they took double money in their hand, and Benjamin; and rose up, and went down to Egypt, and stood before Joseph.”

And when the ten brothers of Joseph went down to Egypt a second time, Benjamin going in Simeon’s place, they came to the place where Joseph was selling grain to the people; where they stood before their brother and bowed before him. When Joseph saw that Benmamin was with them, as he had required of them the trip before, he called the chief steward over his house to kill the best animal and make ready a banquet.

The brothers were then ushered into Joseph’s house for the meal. Upon arriving at the entrance of Joseph’s house they became very fearful, thinking they were going to be deemed guilty of stealing, and taken into slavery.

But Joseph’s chief steward, the one in charge of his house, treated the brothers very graciously, and when they spoke of the money, he would not receive it from them for he said his records showed they had paid in full for the grain, and he suggested the money must have from the Almighty. The steward then brought them into Joseph’s house where he gave them water to wash their feet. When Joseph arrived about noon, the brothers along with Benjamin, presented the present which Jacob had sent while they bowed to the ground before him.

Joseph, in dealing with his brothers, had no idea of what might have transpired since he was last present at home with them. Had the brothers mistreated Benjamin as they had done to him? How had his father fared in twenty-three yers since then? Were Joseph’s brothers still harboring their hatred toward him? Upon the arrival of Benjamin, there immediately came a natural change in Joseph’s conduct, for Jacob was safe and Benjamin was safe.

At the sign of Benjamin, Joseph’s heart melted. Joseph’s heart was so overwhelmed by the presence of his family he could not longer keep back the tears, in haste he went to his private room and wept. Washing his face he reentered their presence and ordered the servants to set the table for dinner. Joseph was served at a table by himself. The Egyptian officers were seated by themselves and the eleven brothers were served separately by themselves, for Simeon had been released from prison to join his brothers. Joseph himself had arranged the order of the seating of the brothers.

The brothers were astonishingly amazed, fo rthey coul dnot imagine how the Egyptian ruler could know the order of their age from the firstborn to the youngest. To test his brothers, Joseph sent special dishes of delicacies from his table to the others with Benjamin’s portion being five times greater than the rest. Unaffected by this, the brother’s continued banqueting in joy, and Joseph could see there was no jealousy remaining among them.

After the banquet, Joseph commanded his chief steward to fill every man’s sack with grain, as much as they could possibly handle; again placing each man’s money in his sack. Then Joseph instructed that his silver cup be put into the sack of the youngest. In order to determine just how loyal his brothers were to their father, Joseph devised a plan which would reveal to what extent the brothers would go to restore Banjamin to the safety of their father.

In the cool of the morning, the brothers took their leave to return to their fater in Canaan. Before the brothers had gone very far beyond the limits of the city, Joseph instructed his steward to follow and overtake them; inquiring why they had committed an evil against their gracio0us host. The steward inquired why they had taken the silver cup which his master used for drinking and divining.

Upon this accusation, the brothers replied that Yahweh should forbid that they would do such a dastardly thing. The brothes reminded the steward of their honesty in returning th emoney they had found in their sacks after their fisrst trip, and why should they now steal gold or silver from the master’s house?

The brothers were so sure no one of them had taken the cjup, they pronounced death upon the person who might do such a thing, plus all the rest of them would volunteer to become his master’s bondsmen. Whereupon, the steward agreed that with whomsoever the silver cup be found, he shall become his master’s servant, and the rest shall be blameless. To this all the brothers agreed and invited the steward to search their belongings. Then each of the brothers unlashed their sacks to the ground to be opened and searched. There they found each man’s money, for the second time, as they searched from the eldest to the youngest.

Having taken down the sacks from off the asses, and searching through the first ten sacks, they found nly the money; but when they came to Benjamin’s possesion, the brothers were greatly distressed and returned dejected with the steward to Joseph’s house where they again bowed to the ground before Joseph.

Being brought before Joseph, he asked them why they had committed such an evil deed, and didn’t they know he could divine such things? Then Judah spoke up, showing his natural ability to lead and taking upon himself the responsibility for all that had happened. Judah said to Joseph,

“My Master, what is it that we can say to you for we are at a loss for words? How can we clear ourselves for the Almighty has found out our iniquity? For this we must now become your slaves; both that are older and th eyoungest in whose sack the cup was found.”

Joseph replied to Judah, “Only the one that was guilty; the one who had taken the cup; he will be kept as my slave. As for the rest of you, return home to your father.” Joseph was testing the brothes to see whether they were still selfish, and were willing to let Banjamin suffer while they could escape. Would they purchase their own liberty by the surrender of Benjamin.

Then Judah came humbly forward, the very one who had conspired with his brothers to sell Joseph as a slave, and made a frantic plea while falling at Joseph’s feet. Judah said to Joseph,

“Oh my master, let thy lowly servant beg of thee to speak a word in mhy master’s ear; let not thine anger burn against they servant, for thou are as great as Pharaho.”

“Remember,” said Judah to Joseph, “how you asked us if we had a father or brother? And we replied unto you. My master, We have at home a father, an old man, and a child of his old age, a young one, and the child’s brother who is dead. And the child is the only one left of his mother, and his father has a special love for him. Remember my master, you said, ‘bring him down unto me that I may take a look at him? And we we answered you, The lad cannot leave his father, for if he sould lose him as he did our deceased brother, he would surely die of grief. Remember, master, you said to us, Unless your yongest brother come down with you, I will not give you audience. And when we arrived at our home, we related these words of jy master to our father. As our supples ran low, our father told us to go again and buy more food. Then my father reminded me that Rachel had borne him two sons and one was torn in pieces by a wild animal. And then he said, If you also take Benjamin and mischief befall him, ye shall bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave. Therefore, if we return to our father and upon seeing the lad is not with us, inasmuch as his entire affectionis bound up in him, he will surely die of grief and all of us shall have brought our father’s sorrow down to his grave. I pledged to my father, I would become surety for the lad; I promised to bear the blame if the boy was not returneed home safely. If our youngest brother does not return with us, it will likely kill our dear old father who grieved so greatly over th eloss of his favorite son. Now, let my youngest brother return home to his father and I will stay in his place as a slave for you. How can I return and face my father lest he be with me? I cannot bear to see wht this would do to him.”

Joseph now recognized what he was longing to know; his brother’s old malice was gone. By seeing Judah willing to suffer so his brother might be spared, Joseph could no longer contain his innermost-conscious emotions.

His spirit was so overwhelmingly exploding within himself, he could not longer hide his identity from them, for his heart longed so for his brothers; he could not restrain from weeping agains with tears of love and joy. Immediately, he sent all of his Eghyptian servants from the room so the brothers were there alone with him when he announced to them, without an interpreter: “I am Joseph; is my father reallhy still alive?”

Startled to hear the Egyptian ruler speak to them ni their own language without an interpreter, for the first time they knew this stern man who had their lives in his hand was their own brother whom they had wronged. Weeping aloug, even though Joseph had dismissed the Egyptians, they and the house of Pharaoh still heard.

Again Joseph said to his brothers:

“Come near to me that I may speak with you. I am Joseph your brother whom ye sold into Egypt. Be not troubled in your heart for all that which you have done; be not angry with yourselves for selling me hither, for Yahweh sent me before you to preserve a posterity (race) in the earth and save our family (tree) alive. It was not you that sent me to this place, but Yahweh; He has made me a father to Pharaoh, an overseer of his house; and ruler throughout Egypt. Two years of the famine are past and there are five years remaining with no earing or harvest. Go now in haste and bring hither my father and all his family with him. Tell him, thus saith thy son Joseph, Yahweh hath made me the master of all Egypt; come down to me and tarry not.”

Joseph then put his arms around Benjamin’s neck, kissed him and wept over him. In turn, Benjamin wept on his neck. Joseph then kissed each of his brothers in turn to show them he had fully forgiven them. Upon this, the brothers began to lose their fear of him and talked with him more freely.

After this, Joseph sent his brothers back to Canaan with all this impelling news, rich gifts and food in abundance. This time the brothers didn’t return leading or riding their asses, but Joseph also sent wagons in which Jacob, his wives and little ones of his family were to ride from Canaan back to Eghypt. Above all, Joseph’s brothers returned hom much happier than they had been for many years. Joseph had given instructions to his brothers to tell their father Jacob:

“There are still five years of very oppressive famine left. Come to Egypt as our father Abraham did, and here will I nourish thee and all your household lest your household and all of your possessions come to poverty. And ye shall tell our father of all my glory in Egypt, and of all that ye have seen; and ye shall haste and bring down my father hither.”

To all his brothers Joseph gave each man changes of raiment, but to Benjamin he gave three hundred pieces of silver and five changes of raiment.

Jacob Goes Down To Egypt

Each day Jacob would look out across the country to see if he could see any sign of the brothers returning from Egypt, for rations were getting low. One day he sighted a caravan of wagons and many burden-bearing animals, but it couldn’t be the brothers for they had no wagons and there were entirely too many asses for it to be them. Jacob said to himself, “Maybe tomorrow.” Somewhat later, Jacob noticed the caravan was coming his way, and he wondered why they were headed in his direction.Finally, as they came ner, he became aware it was the brothers, but why all the array?

Upon arriving, the brothers broke the news to Jacob that Joseph was still alive.

“And told him, saying, Joseph is yet alive, and he is governor over all the land of Egypt. And Jacob’s heart fainted, for he believed them not. And they told him all the words of Joseph, which he had said unto them: and when he saw the wagons which Joseph had sent to carry him, the spirit of Jacob their father revived: And Israel said, it is enough; Joseph my son is yet alive: I will go and see him before I die.” (Genesis 45:26-28)

Out of a land of Famine into a Land of Plenty: So Joseph’s eleven brothers returned to their home in Canaan, carryign with them the good news to their father that Joseph was still alive. With this joyful message Jacob fainted, but soon after, came to his senses again. Hearing that Joseph was still in the land of the living, Jacob determined to go see him while there was still time. Seeing the wagons that Joseph had sent, Jacob gathered up all the members of his family and possessions, for he had many, and took their journey into Egypt

We can just imagine them going on their sojourn with their wives and children along with their many servants, sheep and cattle, as a very large company. Accordingly, Jacob and all his family memebers numbered threescore and ten souls, and by the express efforts of Joseph were allowed to settle in a district known as Goshen.

Joseph met Pharaoh and told him his father and brethren, flocks, herds and all that they had were coming out of the land of Canaan and arriving in Goshen. Joseph, meeting this large caravan of his people along with all their possessions in Goshen, spied out Jacob, his father; embraced him kissing and weeping a good long while.

There in Goshen, Joseph nourished his father, brethren and all their household with bread, according to their family needs. On the way to Egypt, Jacob stopped at Beersheba, the former home of Isaac and Abraham to make offerings to Yahweh (Genesis 46:1). While there, he was given a night vision that his descendants would become a nation while in Egypt, and Yahweh would cause them to return to Canaan.

Joseph took five of his brothers and presented them before Pharaoh where he asked of their occupation. The brothers informed Pharaoh, they and their forefathers before them had always been shepherds and were come into his land because the pastures in Canaan had failed them because of the famine, and they were in need of an area to graze their cattle.

Afterward, Joseph presented his father to Pharaoh where he told him he was 130 years old, but not nearly as old as his forefathers before him, whereupon he blessed Pharaoh.

It is important to notice this blessing of Pharaoh by Jacob, for it was not permitted by our people to bless someone who is not of our own racial stock. As before stated, this particular Pharaoh must have been of the line of Shem.

The famine was not only in Egypt, but throughout Canaan and adjacent areas. The famine was simply pauperizing Egypt, and the inhabitants found their money exhausted and their cattle and substance completely depleted in order to purchase food from the publ granaries, until at length, they had nothing to give in exchange for food but to sell themselves to Pharaoh as bondsmen. From all this, it appears that both Joseph and the Pharaoh were of th eline of shem while the common Egyptians were of other stock, for under Hebrew Law it would otherwise be illegal to do this.

In the process, Joseph gathered up all the Egyptian’s money along with their land and purchased them as bondsmen and gave all this to the Pharaoh. So did Joseph deal with all the people from other lands that came to buy food, with the exceptino of his own family. So Joseph bought all the land of Egypt, for Pharaoh, and the land became Pharaoh’s. The peop.le too, “Joseph removed to cities from one end of the borders of the land to the other.” (Genesis 47:21)

It also appears the priesthood may have been of theline of Shem, for Joseph made them exempt. We can be sure the priests of On were Shemites. The land which previously belonged to the Egyptians, was not leased back to them as tenants at a rent of one-fifth of the produce (possibly onhe tenth for Pharaoh to operate his government and one tenth for the priesthood).

Jacob Blesses Joseph’s Two Son

Jacob lived to the age of almost a hundred and fifty years. Knowing his death was near, he called Joseph and his sons to him to bless them. He said to Joseph,

“When I die, don’t bury me here in this land of Egypt, but return my body to our home land of Canaan, and bury me there in the cave at Hebron, with our fathers, Abraham and Isaac.” (This is a paraphrase, the story can be found in Genesis 48)

Joseph then brought his two sons named Manasseh andE-hraim to his father’s bedside. Jacob’s eyes were beginning to fail him because of his age as his father Isaac’s had done, and it was difficult for him to see the two young lads. Upon their entering, Jacob replied, “Who are these?” (Genesis 48:8)

Joseph said to Jacob, “These are my two sons, whom Yahweh has given me in this land,” Jacob replied, “Bring them to my side,” Jacob replied, “and I shall bless them here before I die.” (Genesis 48:9)

“And Israel said unto Joseph, I had not thought to see thy face: and, lo, God hath shewed me also thy seed. And Joseph brought them out from between his knees, and he bowed himself with his face to the earth. And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel's left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel's right hand, and brought them near unto him. And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the firstborn. And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day,

The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.

And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's head. And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head. And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and HIS SEED SHALL BECOME A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS.” (Genesis 48:11‑19)

For those of today who Yahweh has opened their eyes, know America is Ephraim and Great Britain is Manasseh. There is no other nation in all of history which became a “MULTITUDE OF NATIONS” other than the United States, which is composed of 50 different nations under one commonwealth of nations forming the United States of America.

Death of Joseph

For the death of Joseph, we will quote from “The Popular And Critical Bible Encyclopedia And Scriptural Dictionary,” volume 2, page 985:

“Death of Joseph: Joseph lived an hundred and ten years, kind and gentile in his affection sto the last; for we are told “The children of Machir, the son of Manasseh were brought upon Joseph’s kneea (Genesis 50:23). And so having obtained a promise from his brethren that when the time came, as he assured the it would come, that Yahweh would visit them, and ‘bring them unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob,’ they would carry his bones out of Egypt, Joseph at length ‘died, and they embalmed him and he was put in a coffin’ (Genesis 50:26). This promise was religiously fulfilled. His descendants, after carrying the corpse about with them in their wanderins, at length put in its final resting place in Shechem, in a parcel of ground that Jacob bought of the sons of Hamor, which became the inheritance of the children of Joseph. (Joshua 24:32)

“By his Egyptian (Semitic) wife Asenath, daughter of the high priest of Heliopolis (On; Beth Shemesh, or house of Shem), Joseph had two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim (Genesis 41:50), whom Jacob adopted (Genesis 48:5), and who accordingly took their place among the heads of the twelve tribes of Israel.”

Apartheid in Egypt For Israel

We are told by many, the people of Egypt were the same white stock of people as the Israelites. THIS IS NOT ENTIRELY TRUE. This is why it was so necessary for the Israelites to settle in an area where the two peoples woldn’t mix. Even the standard Bible commentaries are aware of this. This is from “The Wycliffe Bible Commentary,” page 43, commenting on Genesis 46:31-34:

“Before Joseph presented his family to Pharaoh, he gave them specific directions about how to reply to the ruler’s questions. When asked about their calling, they were to represent themselves as shepherds. Then Pharaoh would likely assign them the land of Goshen as their dwelling place. Goshen would provide excellent grazing for their flocks and herds. They would be together, and therefore well protected FROM MIXING WITH OTHER PEOPLES.”

In “The Believer’s Bible Commenatary,” by William MacDonald, page 79, we have further confirmation that this was indeed the reason for the Israelites settling in a place where they could be isolated to themselves:

“It was agreed that they would tell Pharaoh that they were shepherds. Since shepherds were despised by the Egyptians, Pharaoh would let them live in the land of Goshen, far away from the royal palace. There in Goshen they were isolated from social intercourse with the Egyptians, first because of their nationality (Genesis 43:32) and then because of their occupation. God left them in this incubator until they were a strong nation, able to possess the land that He promised to their forefathers.”

The Hyksos had invaded Egypt from Arabia, Syria and Ethiopia and made a bad name for shepherds. The Hyksos were not at all like the former Shepherd Kings that came into Egypt some five hundred years earlier who were Shemites. These Hyksos were a hord of marauders who invaded Egypt and ruled by tyranny.

To separate themselves form the Egyptians, Joseph and his brothers requested the land of Goshen to live in. Wherever the land of Goshen was, it had to be a place the Egyptians were not already occupying in order for the Israelites to be dwellign separately by themselves. The Delta area does not fit this criteria. If the Israelites were to have settled in the Delta area, there would have been all kinds of people moving in and out from time to time. Goshen had to be a place of seclusion and the Faiyûm area fits this very nicely.

We full well realize that some people will take exception to where the Israelites were placed in Faiyûm rather than in the Nile River Delta area. They will make reference to Psalm 78:12, 43 and point out the text of this Psalm is speakingof the Exodus from Egypt taking place at Zoan, and that Zoan was a city in the Delta area. In doing so, they are both right and wrong. Yes, Soan was a city in the Delta area, but there is more to the story.

The City of Zoan A Misnomer

Zoan (later to be called Tanis) was a city in the Nile River Delta area built seven years after Hebron in Canaan. (Numbers 13:22) Inasmuch as the Hyksos were the ones who built Zoan, this establishes them in Egypt before the time of Abraham at the plain of Mamre in Canaan. (Genesis 13:18) So we can understand what is meant in Psalm 78:12, 43, we will now quote from “Insight On The Scriptures,” volume 2, pages 1238-1239:

“Zoan: An ancient Egyptian city, built seven years after hebron, hence already in existence around the time of Abraham’s entry into Canaan...(Numbers 13:22); Genesis 12:5; 13:18) The bible name Zoan corresponds to the Egyptian name (d’n-t) of a town located in the northeastern part of the Delta region, about 35 miles southwest of Port Said. Better known by its Greek name, Tanis (near present-day San el-Hagar), it was situated on the branch of the Nile called the Tanitic branch.

“As Psalm 78:12, 43, ‘the field of Zoan’ is used parallel to the land of Egypt’ in recounting Jehovah’s (Yahweh’s) miraculous acts o behalf of Israel leading up to the Exodus. This has caused some scholars to hold that Moses’ meetings with Pharaoh took place at Zoan. Similarly, it has led to the effort to link Zoan (Tanis) with the city of Rameses, as well as with the city of Avaris, referred to by Manetho in his account about the so-called Hyksos kings. Thus, many modern reference works say that Zoan’s name changed to Avaris under the ‘Hyksos,’ then changed to Rameses under the Ramesside dynasty, and finally reverted to Zoan (in the Greek form Tanis). It may be noted, however, that the Bible uses the name Zoan consistently as applying before the Exodus (back to Abraham’s time), at the time of the Exodus, and as late as the eighth, seventh, and sixth centuries B.C.E. (In the time of the prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel).

“If Zoan were the site of Moses’ interviews with Pharaoh, this would certainly give some indication as to the starting point of the Exodus route. However, several factors place this view in doubt. For Zoan to refer to such a site, the expression ‘the field of Zoan’ would have to be viewed, not as simply paralleling‘the land of Egypt,’ but as a much more specific expression, designating the precise location where themiracles occurred. Such a limiting or restrictive sense would not actually fit the case, for the Ten Plagues did not occur in just one part of Egypt (such as a portion of the Delta) but throughout the entire land. This would seem to support the view that ‘the field of Zoan’ is used as a parallel of ‘the land of Egypt.’

“Those modern scholars who endeavor to present Zoan (or according to their attempted conection, Avaris, or Rameses) as Pharaoh’s residence at the time of the Exdus also face a lack of Biblical support and agreement in several respects. The Bible shows that Moses’ first encounter took place at the edge of the Nile River (Exoxus 7:14-15) Zoan (Tanis) is not on the actual river but at the terminus of one of the ancient branches forking off from the main stream. In attempting to locate the city of Rameses at the same place as Zoan, or Tanis, THEY ALSO PASS OVER THE FACT THAT ZOAN WAS ALREADY A CITY IN ABRAHAM’S TIME...

“Those scholars would make Zoan (Avaris-Rameses, as they identify it) the Egyptian capital at the time of the Exodus, whereas the bible identifies Rameses as merely a ‘storage place.’ And, in holding that Rameses II was the Pharaoh of theExodus because of the claim that he was the builder of the city of Rameses (or, more accurately, a place called Per-Rameses), they ignore the fact that the building of the Biblical Rameses began 80 years or more before the Exodus (before the birth of Moses {Exodus 1:11; 2:10}), whereas historians credit Ramses II with a rule of only about 66 years...

“The question remains, then, why ‘the field of Zoan’ is apparently used to parallel ‘the land of Egypt’ with regard to Jehovah’s (Yahweh’s) performance of miraculous acts. While a possible connection with Pharaoh’s court cannot be completely discounted. It is also entirely possible that the great age of the city caused the psalmist to use Zoan in such a way, it apparently being one of the earliest cities found in Egypt. Its us, if this was the case, might be similar to the use of ‘Plymouth Rock’ as representing the early colonizing of the United States...

“There is no doubt as to the importance of the city of Zoan (Tanis), particularly with respect to commercial trade and religious structures. There is evidence of much royal building there from the time of the early ‘dynasties’ Egyptian kings onward...the prophet Isaiah, in the divine pronouncement against Egypt, had referred to ‘the prines of Zoan’ and classed them with those of Noph (Memphis), thereby point up also the political importance of Zoan...” (Isaiah 19:1, 11-13)

From this quotation, you can see the phrase “the field of Zoan” is just another way of saying “the land of Egypt.” ( This is much the same as Israel being called by another name: Israel’s other name is “Jeshurun” (Deuteronomy 32:15)) The word “field” in the Hebrew should tip us off, as it means a plowed field which Egypt is for over a thousand miles to the south of Zoan.With this kind of a meaning, it in no way identifies the land of Goshen where the Israelites resided while they were dwelling there.

From this, it is obvious, we must take into account, not the literal language, but the intent of the scribe. Unless we can resolve such matters, thee is no way we can come to a full understanding of Scripture. Not only do we have to adjust for intent, but there is the matter of errors, idioms and parables.

The Dictionary says an idiom is: A speech that is peculiar to itself within the usage of a given language. Inasmuchas we have taken up the matter of intent and parables, let’s deal with the problem of idioms. Here are a couple of modern-day idioms: We might say that we had a good time over the weekend; we went out and painted the town red. We really didn’t take a bucket of red paint along with a paint brush and try to paint the houses and whatever around town. It’s just a modern-day idiomatic saying, we had a good time. Then sometimes, when we know a person that seems to ahve prospered all of their life, we say, they were born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Surely no one ever came from the womb with a silver spoon in their mouth!

Like our English language, the Bible languages of Hebrew-Chaldee and Greek have their own Idioms, parable and intent. The subject we just discussed concerning “the field of Zoan” is a good illustration of why we need to know the intent of the scribe. If you are reading your Bible literally in all cases, you are not getting the total qualified message. Is it any wonder we have so many interretations of Scripture, and so few absolutely clear Scriptural facts?

The Term “Pharaoh”

Not Used Until 18^th Dynasty

As this subtitle suggests, the term or title of “pharaoh” didn’t exist before the 18^th Egyptian Dynasty. This, in turn, implies, that because Scripture uses this term, it wa written during or after the 18^th dynasty. This is more evidence the Israelite sojour in Egypt was during this time-period. For informaiton on this, we will quote from “The World Book Encyclopedia,” volume 15, page 315:

“PHARAOH: Fair oh, was a title of the later kings of ancient Egypt. The Egyptians did not call their ruler pharaoh until the Eighteenth Dynasty (1570-1300 B.C.) Even then, pharaoh was not one of the king’s most important titles. Writers of the Old Testament almost always used pharaoh as a title for the king of Egypt.

“The word pharaoh comes from two Egyptian words, peraa, Per-aa means great house, and at first these words described the royal palace, not the king...

“In theory, the pharaoh owned all the land and people in Egypt. In reality, his power was limited by strong groups, including the priests and nobles. His actions were governed by rules of conduct which the Egyptians believed the gods had set down.”

As this is quite an important matter into our investigation of Egypt, we will now use a second witness concerning this; the “World Scope Encyclopedia,” volume 9, under “Pharaoh:”

“Pharaoh (fa´ro): A name applied by the Scriptures and many Hebrew writers to the rulers of Egypt. It is used as if it were a proper name, but it is only an official title, as shah is a title of the Persian rulers, khan of the Tartars, and czar of the Russians. The title corresponds to the Ph-Ra found on the monuments of Egypt, which signifies the sun. it is qusite difficult to determine the particular monarch to whom reference is made by the use of this title, but generally the application is to thegyptiand king under whom Joseph flourished, and theline under whom the oppressin of the Israelites and the exodus took place.”

Pharaohs Depicted As The Sun

In ancient times, rulers were depicted as the sun. If you will remember, in Joseph’s dream, the sun,moon and eleven stars bowed before him, Genesis 37:9-10. In the intepretation of the dream it was undersood, the sun represented his father, the moon his mother, and the eleven stars his brothers. On the Egyptian monuments and various inscriptions, there is much depiction of the sun. It would appear there are two ways to construte this: (1) It might represent the king and vice-regent of a coutnry along with some of the administrative officers, or (2) It might be a form of worshiping the physical heavenly bodies themselves. Maybe, in some cases, it could be both. We must be careful, theefore, not to point afinger every time we see the sun or monuments and delare it as sun worship. If we do this, we msut accuse Joseph and his family of sun worship also. It is one thing to depict the sun, moon and stars as representing ruler0ship, and quite another to enter into the worship of these heavenly bodies. As we get into the study of Egyptian monuments, it would be well to remember this, and apply it accordingly.

Israel Becomes A Nation

In Exodus 1:7 we are simply told they “increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceedingly mighty.” The in Exodus 1:12 it contines:

“But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew.”

This is a great passage of Scripture, but there is really more to the story. To expand on this, we will quote form three different commentaries. First, we will uote from “Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible,” abridged by Ralph Earle, pages 90-91:

“The children of Israel were fruitful, Paru, a general term signifying that they were like healthy trees, bringing forth an abundance of fruit (children). And increased.‘They increased like fishes’ as the original word implies.’Abundantly. Yirbu, ‘they multiplied’; this is a separate term, and should not have been used as an adverb by our translators. And waxed exceedingly mighty. And they became strong beyond measrue; ‘superlatively, superlatively,’ so that the land (Goshen) was filled with them. This astonishing increase was, under the providence of God (Yahweh), chiefly owing to two causes: (1) The Hebrew women were exceedinly fruitful, suffered very little in parturition (childbirth), and probably often brought forth twins. (2) There appear to have been no premature deaths among them. Thus in about t20 hundred and fifteenyears they were multipllied to upwards of 600,000, independently of old men, women, and children.” (See Numbers 1:3; Exodus 12:37)

Secondly, in order to amplify on this, we will quote from the “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary On The Whole Bible,” page 53:

“Children of Israel were fruitful: They were living in a land where, according to the testimony of an ancietn author (possibly Aristotle), mothers produced three and four sometimes at birth; and a modern writer declares ‘the females in Egypt, as well among the human race as among animals, surpassing all others in fruitfulness.’ To this natural circumstance must be added the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham.”

Thirdly, for further commentary on this passabe, we will now quote from “Matthew Poole’s Commentary On The Holy Bible,” volume 1, page 117:

“Here are many words, and very emphatical, to express their incredible multiplication, they waxed exceedingly mighty; which may relate either to their numbers, which greatly added to their strength, or to their constitution, to note that their offspring was strong as well as numerous.

Atheistical wits cavil at this story, and pretend it impossible that out of seventy persons should cmoe above six hundred thousand men within two hundred and fifteen years; wherein they betray no less ignorance than impiety.

For they say nothing of the extraordinary fruitfulness of the {Hebrew} women in Egypt, who oft bring forth four or five children at one birth, as Aristotle notes (Hist. Animal. 7:4), nor of the long lives of themen of that age, nor of the plurality of wives then much in use, nor of the singular blessing of God (Yahweh) upon the Hebrews in giving them conceptins and births without abortion, all which are but very reasonable suppositions, the probability of it may plainly appear this: Suppose there were only two hundred years reckoned, and only fifty prsons who did beget children, and these begin not to beget before they be twenty years old, and then each of them beget only three children.

“Divide this time now into ten times twenty years. In the first time, of 50 came 150. In the second 150 came 450. Of them in the third, came 1,350. Of them in the fourth, 4,050. Of these in the fifth, 12,150. Of these in the sixth, 36,450. Of these in the seventh, 109,350. Of them in the tenth 2,952,450. If it be objected, that we read nothing of their great multiplication till after Joseph’s death, which some say was not above fifty years before their going out of Egypt, it may be easily replied:

1). This is a great mistake, for there were above one hundred and forty years between Joseph’s death and their going out of Egypt, as may appear thus: It is granted tht the Israelites were in Egypt about two hundred and ten or two hundred and fifteen years in all. They came not thither till Joseph was near forty years old, as is evident in comparing Genesis 41:46, with Genesis 45:6. So there rests only seventy years of Joseph’s life, which are the firt part of the time of Israel’s dwelling in Egypt, and there remian one hundred and forty-five years, being the other part of the two hundred and fifteen years.

2). That the Israelites did multiply much before Joseph’s death, though Scripture be silent in it, as it is of many other passages confessedly true, cannot be reasonably doubted. But if there was any defect in the numbers proposed in the first fifty-five years, it might be abundantly compensated in the one hundred and forty-five years succeeding. And so the computation remains good.”

Where on Earth Did All The Israelites Go?

In Exodus 12:37, w are told the number of the children of Israel that came out of Egypt were: “about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, besides children.” During the time of David, a decision was made to take a census. The results of that census is given in 2 Samuel 24:9:

“And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drw the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men.”

By the time of Abijah (son of Solomon and grandson of David) Judah went to war against Israel. We will not go into the detials of that engagement, but only notice how large the two armies were as found in 2^nd Chronicles 13:3:

And Abijah set the battle in array with an army of valiant men of war, even four hundred thousand chosen men: Jeroboam also set the battle in array against him with eight hundred thousand chosen men, being mighty men of valour.”

Here we have a situation, where between Judah and Israel there were 1.2 to 1.3 million men in full battle array. If this was the total number of fighting men as specified by Scripture, what was the total population, including women, children and men too old for war, in all of Israel and Judah? A figure of 3.75 million would be conservative. As you can clearly see, the increase of population in Israel, from the Exodus until the time of David, Solomon, Rehoboam and Abijah, is very noticeable.

To take it a step farther, what would the potential overall population have been of Judah and Israel four hundred years later during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah? We took a rough calculation of this: By dividing 1,300,000 by 600,000 we figured a gain in fighting men over a seven hundred year period of 217%.

This would be a gain of 31% every hundred years. We then took the conservative figure of 3,750,000 and figured an increase of 31% each one hundred years for the next 400 years. On this bsis, we came up with an estimated popultin for all Israel (Israel and Judah) of 11,043,747, which we feel is very conservative.

Theologians of churhianity have two suppositions today as to what happened to Israel. The one theory is that they were absorbed by their captors, never to be found again, thus annulling all of the promises and Covenants of Yahweh, making Him a liar. The other theory is that all the israelites returned to Jude from Babylon after the Babylonian captivity, Ezra 2:64:

“The whole congregatioinh together was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore.” (42,360)

We have a questiong: Where are all the other 11,001,386 of both Israel and Judah for this period of time? We have read different postulations trying to prove that all the Israelites returned by pointing out Anna of the tribe of Aser (Asher), Luke 2:36, and saying, “you see there, that proves all the tribes returned after the Babylonian captivity.” With one single Israelite, they try to account for millions.

Knew Not Joseph

In Exodus 1:8, we are told:

“Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.”

Does this mean that there was a pharaoh to arise who didn’t personally know Joseph? Or is it speaking of a pharaoh who didn’t remember the good administration of Joseph over Egypt? One who had forgotten how, through Joseph’s great leadership, he had saved theEgyptians from starvatin; one who was unmindful and ungrateful. For consideration on this, let’s refer to “The Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible,” abridged by Ralph Earle, page 90:

“Which knew not Joseph. The verb yada, which we translate ‘to know,’ often signifies to ‘acknowledge’ or ‘approve.’ See Judges 2:10; Psalm 1:6; 31:7; Hosea 2:8; Amos 3:2. We may therefore understand by the new king’s not knowing Joseph his disapproving of that system of government which Joseph had established, as well as his haughtily refusin to acknowledge the obligations udner which the whole land of Egypt was laid to this eminent prime minister of one of his predecessors.”

For another witness concerning the meanign of this passage let’s consider the observations as found in “Matthew Poole’s Commentary On The Bible,” volume 1, page 117:

“A new king, i.e., another king; one of another disposition, or interest, or family; for the kingdom of Egypt did oft pass from one family to another, as appears from the history of the Dynasties recorded by ancient writers. Which knew not Joseph, or, acknowledged not the vast obligations which Joseph had said upon the kingdom of Egypt, and the king under whom Joseph lived, but upon all his successors in regard of thos vast additions of wealth and power which he had made to tht crown. This phrase notes his ungrteful disowning and ill requiting of Joseph’s favors...”

“The Interpreter’s Bible,” volume 1, page 853 puts it very nicely as follows:

“The new king could not possibly have known Joseph personally. But what is implied is that he launched a new policy with respect to the Israelites. He chose to ignore the past services of Joseph...”

Ye Shall Kill Him

Because the new pharaoh was apprehensive about the rapid increase of the Israelites, he decided to take very drastic measures to reverse this course of events. Exodus 1:11 indicates the pharaoh decided to work the male Israelites excessivly to the point where, when they went home at night, they would be too tired to procreate more children. The pharaoh was more interested in birth control than he was in productivity. IT MAKES ONE WONDER IF THE ENEMY TODAY IS KEEPING WAGES SO LOW, THE MEN HAVE TO WORK AN EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF HOURS JUST TO BREAK EVEN, THE WOMEN HAVING TO WORK ALSO BECAUSE THE MEN CANNOT MAKE ENOUGH TO TAKE CARE OF THE FAMILY, and THUS, CONTROL OUR WHITE POPULATION.

ON THE OTHER HAND THE ENEMY, THE “JEW,” IS DIRECTING WELFARE TO THE NONWHITES SO THEY CAN STAY HOME ALL DAY AND ALL NIGHT LONG AND PROCREATE VAST NUMBERS OF THEIR OWN RACE, ALONG WITH THE WHITE WOMEN SLUTS AVAILABLE TO THEM. The second course the pharaoh instituted was to kill all the newly-born Israelite male children. The pharaoh was more than willing to leave the Israelite girls as breeding-stock for the Egyptian men though. EVERYTHING THAT IS HAPPENING TODAY WAS OCCURRING BACK THEN; THERE SIMPLY ISN’T ANYTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. Of course, too, we have to take into account who the pharaoh was for this period. As we see it, he was either a half-breed Mongol-Harrian, or married to a Mongol-harrian, and under her influence (Tuthmoses I or Tuthmosis II of the 18^th Dynasty). These are the same satanic people Esau had married with.

For more information on this, we will now quote from “The Wycliffe Bible Commentary,” page 53:

“Daughter. Daughters were spared since they could be taken and married to Egyptians, thus losing their national identity...”

Speaking of the Hebrew girls to be left alive, “Matthew Poole’s Commentary On The Holy Bible,” volume 1, page 118 says:

“They reserved them for their lust, or for service, or for the inrease of their people, and the raising of a fairer breed by them.”

For more on this subject, let’s go to “Matthew Henry’s Commentary On The Whole Bible,” volume 1, page 272:

...They took care to keep them poor, by charging them with heavy taxes, which, some think, is included in the burdens with which they afflicted them (IS THIS NOT WHAT THE ENEMY IS DOING TODAY, BY KEEPING TAXES SO HIGH THAT IT IS A BURDEN?)...By this means they took an effectual course to make them slaves.

“The Israelites, it would seem, were a much more industrious laborious people than the Egyptians, and therefore pharaoh took care to find them work, both in building...and in husbandry even all manner of service in the field (Exodus 1:14)...To ruin their health and shorten their days, and so diminish their numbers...to discourage them from marrying, since their children would be born to slavery...To oblige them to desert the Hebrews, and incorporate themselves with the Egyptians.

“Thus he hoped to cut off the name of Israel, that it might be no more in remembrance. And it is to be feared that the oppression they were under had this bad effect upon them, that i brought over many of them to join with the Egyptians in their idolatrous worship...(Joshua 24:14; Ezekiel 20:8)...God had threatened to destroy them for it, even while in the land of Egypt: however they were kept a distinct body, UNMINGLED with the Egyptians...”

Matthew Henry continues to comment on page 273 as follows:

Pharaoh and Herod sufficiently proved themselves agents for that great red dragon, who stood to devour the man-child as soon as it was born. Revelation 12:3-4)”

If we can understand that this persecuting pharaoh and Herod were of the same family line, the enslavement of the Israelites, during this period, starts to make a lot of sense. We can begin to see this was the same old “enmity” of the two seeds of Genesis 3:15 showing itself as it did when Herod killed all the little Banjamites in an attempt to kill the Messiah. For more documentation connecting thispharaoh, Herd and the Dragon of Revelation 12, we will gather a few quotes. First, from “Jamieson, Fausett & Brown Commentary On The While Bible,” page 1561:

“So the dragon, represented by his agent Pharaoh ( a name commong to all the Egptian kings, and meaning, according to some, crocodile, a reptile like the dragon, and made an Egyptian idol), was ready to devour Israel’s males at the birth of the nation. Anti-typically the true Israel, Jesus (Yahshua), when born, was sought for destruction by Herod, who slew all the males in and around Bethlehem.”

“The Wycliffe Bible Commentary,” page 1512:

“There stands before this woman the great enemy of God (Yahweh), the dragon (Revelation 12:4), who hopes to dstroy Christ (yahshua). But on this effort he will fail...I peronally believe, with Weidner, Walter Scott, and many others, that this verse is anticipatory, and point to Israel’s time of tribulation at the end of the ate. It is placed here to emphasize the fact that Satan who hates Christ (Yahshua), and hence His people will especially persecute Israel as the age draws to a close.”

The “International Bible Commentary,” by William MacDonald, page 2369:

“The dragon is ready to devour the child as soon as He is born; fulfilled in the attempt of Herod the Great, vassal of Rome, to destroy the newborn King of the Tribe of Judah, destined to rule all the nations with a rod of iron.”

A word of warning: While the above Bible commentary is quite excellent, it is, in every case, MISAPPLIES TO THE “JEWS.” In all of our Bible commentaries, we can use less than 5%, and all the rest is 95% pure garbage. It is certinly a shame the people who put these reference books together don’t know the difference between an Israelite and a “Jew.” In many cases, these commentaries are creted by several contributing editors. Occasionally there are a few good Bible students among them who make some outstanding statements. Therefore, ONE MUST BE ABLE TO SEPARATE THE USEFUL MATERIAL FROM THE CORRUPTION. While most of the comments are but refuse, occasionally they will come up with a real gem, which is extraordinarily remarkable and strikingly meaningful. Most commentaries are in particular useful for their historical content.

As you will note, we have been comparing Egyptian history with that of the Bible, but there is a little more that needs to be said about the Hyksos. In a book entitled “A Short History of Ancient Ebypt,” by T.G.H. James, who on page 95 makes a very interesting observation concerning them:

“It seems that the Hyksos TRIED TO BEHAVE LIKE EGYPTIAN RULERS. Their god was Egyptian; they used Egyptian titles and put their names in cartouches; they built Egyptian-style buildins and APPROPRIATED Egyptian statues for their own use; they also appear to have FOSTERED TRADITIONAL EGYPTIAN CULTURE. It is a strange fact that some of the most interesting surviving papyrus texts were written at this time, including a long series of stories dealing with MAGICAL HAPPENINGS in the Old Kingdom, the remarkable Ebers Papyrus which contains a large number of medical recipes and treatments, and the Rhind Mthematical Papyrus which was written down in the thirty-third year of the fourth Hyksos king, Apophis I (Apepi I). The peoples who are conveniently LUMPED TOGEHTER UNDER THE DESIGNATION HYKSOS DO NOT DEMONSTRATE ANY ISTINCTIVE NATIONAL IDENTITY. They were undoubtedly Asiatic in origin, and they maintained TRADE LINKS with Palestine and Syria, exploiting the opportunities offered by their CONTROL OF THE CHANNELS OF COMMUNIATON WITH THE EAST.”

You will have to admit these Hyksos were a strange people. They seem to have some of the same characteristics as the descendants of Cain. Maybe they should have called them Cyksos (like in “Jew”) instead of Hyksos.

At the end of the 17^th Egyptian Dynasty, at the time of Kamose, Egypt was divided into three unrelated sections. From these divisions, there were kings at Avaris, Thebes and Kush who negotiated commerce and trade as coequals. At thebes, in the temple of amun, Kamose erected a stele expressing his agreement with this situatino saying in effect:

“WE ARE HAPPY WITH OUR BLACK LAND ...THE FLATTEST LANDS ARE PLOWED... CATTLE GRZE IN THE MARSHES...EMMER IS SENT FOR OUR SWINE...SHOULD ANYONE AGGRESS AGAINST US, WE WILL RETALIATE.”

Nevertheless, bemoaning the economic restraints imposed upon him by the king of Avaris, the Theban king resolved to end the partition comlaining:

“Why should I bother contemplating my gains while ther is a ruler at Avaris and a Nubian, each one holding a portion of the Black Land and takinghis slice of the country.”

Kamose thus resented not having direct access of trade routes to Palestine and being prevented access to Nubian minerals. Monuments at Buhen exist which suggest his success in regaining control of Wawat. The Karnak stele documents in great detail Kamose’s assault on Avaris and putting the population of Nefrusy under the sword. A force was then dispatched to gain control of the oasis roads of Bahariya where a letter was intercepted from Apophis, king of Avaris, addressed tot he king of Kush indicating that Avaris was already under attack. The city being heavily fortified could not be razed as Nefrusy was, but, nonetheless, its estates and orchards were plundered and stripped. In all this, its chariot-teams, bronze battle-axes, incense, oil, wood from Palestine,a nd precius metals along with stone were all looted. Thus Kamose returned to Thebes in triumph proving his authority had been demonstrated. This campaign would set a pattern of war to come against the Hyksos until driven out of the land. In such an atmosphere Joseph was sold into Egypt.

The New Kingdom

The “New Kingdom” of Egypt started with the 18^th Dynasty and a pharaoh by the name of Amosis. As we stated before, there are various spellings for these Egyptian names. The 18^th Egyptian Dynasty brought reunification in the reign of this pharaoh Amosis, son of Kamose. Amosis believed that the kings of Thebes were the legitimate successors of the Middle Kingdom whose obligation was to reunite the Black Land all the way from the Mediterranean through the Delta to and including Nubia.

The war which was started by Kamose against Avaris and the occupying Hyksos was continued by Amosis. It was a long drawn-out aggression against Avaris, and the final war was launched late in Amosis’ reign. Some say perhaps in his 20^th year. But it seems that Memphis, which appeared to be out of Kamose’s control, had finally fallen to Thebes. Apophis and Khemudy, the last king pharaohs of Avaris, witnessed their city being attacked repeatedly by Theban marine-style assault troops as many as five different times.

Each attack was characterized by savage fighting on both sides. After Avaris fell, the Theban army crossed the Sinai to besiege a Palestinian fort called Sharuhen within Hyksos territory which helped them (the Hyksos) to maintain and control the flow of commerce. After three years of siege, the Egyptians were finally victorious, slaughtering many, if not nearly all of the Hyksos. No doubt, the Egyptians also took many of the Hyksos as slaves. Thus, the Theban government regained control over trade between Egypt and Palestine. TheEgyptians der Amosis did not pursue the Hyksos on into Palestine at this time. It was some 61 years later that Thutmosis III advanced into that area.

By defeating the Hyksos, Amosis created a realm over a wide area almost as extensive as that of the Middle Kingdom. At last, the upper and lower Nile were once again united. The war that was started under Kamose was now terminated under Amosis. The main land trade routes to Palestine were now restored.

You may be wondering what we should learn from all of this particular Egyptian history during this time-period. It is simply this: If Joseph had been sold into the Delta area during the Hyksos period, and Jacob and his family were later settled there, they would have been in the middle of a war-zone. This war may have lasted up to 40 or 50 years. Nowhere in the Bible does it indicate such a thing! This should be powerful evidence that neither Joseph nor his family were affiliated with the Hyksos. If anything, Joseph may have been the instrument in Amosis’ hands to help drive them out.

If Joseph would have been Grand Vizier to the Hyksos, as many Bible authorities claim, he surely could have gotten word to his family much sooner than he did. Joseph simply had to be locked into an area where he had no communication with Palestine. Have you ever wondered why Joseph didn’t try to get word to his father to inform him where he was? No doubt, he may have tried this many times. If he had been in the Delta area, he could very easily have sent word along the much traveled “Ways of Horus”into Retenu (Palestine) where his father was. On the other hand, if he was sold into the Theban area, it would have been very difficult to get word past the blockade at Avaris then being controlled by the Hyksos.

By dominating Avaris, the Hyksos were able to control traffic both along land routes and also the waterways. It should be evident that Joseph was in a landlocked situation. If he were at Thebes, communication to Palestine would have been cut off for him. Not only di the Hyksos control the Delta area, but they occupied all of Palestine up beyond the Euphrates, even including the territory of the Hurrians. If Joseph were the Grand Vizier of the pharaoh at Avaris, surely he would have had the freedom to go visit his family in Palestine. It is obvious that Joseph had something blocking his way to return, or to even send a message home to his father.

Joseph Went to Egypt

By A Different Way

There is evidence that when Joseph as sold to the Ishmaelites, they entered Egypt by a different way than normal. This can be found in “The Lost Books Of The Bible and The Forgotten Books of Eden” in the “Testament of Zebulun” 1:28:30:

“And when Reuben came and heard that while he was away Joseph had been sold, he rent his grments,and mourning, said: How shall Ilook on the face of my father Jacob? And he took the money and ran after the merchants, but as he failed to find them he returned grieving. But the merchants had left the borad road and marched through the Troglodytes by a short cut.”

The Biblical account of this event is as follows:

“And when they saw him afar off, even before he came near unto them, they conspired against him to slay him. And they said one to another, Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now therefore, and let us slay him, and cast him into some pit, and we will say, Some evil beast hath devoured him: and we shall see what will become of his dreams. AND REUBEN HEARD IT, AND HE DELIVERED HIM OUT OF THEIR HANDS; AND SAID, LET US NOT KILL HIM. And REUBEN SAID UNTO THEM, SHED NO BLOOD, BUT CAST HIM INTO THIS PIT THAT IS IN THE WILDERNESS, AND LAY NO HAND UPON HIM; THAT HE MIGHT RID HIM OUT OF THEIR HANDS, TO DELIVER HIM TO HIS FATHER AGAIN (This shows that Reuben did intened to return and take Joseph back to their father Jacob). And it came to pass, when Joseph was come unto his brethren, that they stript Joseph out of his coat, his coat of many colours that was on him; And they took him, and cast him into a pit: and the pit was empty, there was no water in it...Judah said unto his brethren, What profit is it if we slay our brother, and conceal his blood? Come, and let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him; for he is our brother and our flesh...REUBEN RETURNED UNTO THE PIT (here the Bible confirms that Reuben had been away while the other brothers sold Joseph); and, behold, Joseph was not in the pit; and he rent his clothes. And he returned unto his brethren, and said, THE CHILD IS NOT; AND I, WHITHER SHALL I GO?” (Genesis 37:18‑30)

So if the evidence is correct and it certainly appears that it was from the Biblical account; which does not go into the details on this event; much like the selling of the birthright to Jacob, for the full account is not shown, but is related in another book, the book of Jasher) the Ishmaelites took, Joseph to Egypt by some other route than the usual way. Evidently the “broad road” spoken of in this referecne was the “Way of Horus.” This was the mian route in those days from the Delta to Retenu (Palestine). Therefore, it would only be reasonable to conclude that Joseph was taken someplece in Egypt othe than the Delta. Not only that, but this “short cut” was probably the same road taken when the brothers went to Egypt to buy food and later when Jacob and his family went there, at Joseph’s instructions, to live.

Joseph’s Pharaoh, Amosis I

At this juncture, it would be a good idea to reviw the names of the pharaohs of the 18^th Egptian Dynasty. These Egyptian pharaohs are in the sequence as follows: è Amosis è Amenhotep I è Tuthmosis I è Tuthmosis II è Hatshepsut è Tuthmosis III è Amenhotep II è Tuthmosis IV è Amenhotep III è Amenhotep IV (same as Akhenaten) è Tutankhamun è Ay è Horemheb. In addition to these named pharaohs, it would be well to mention that Kamose was the last pharaoh of the 17^th dynasty. We are not going to consider the pharaohs from Amosis to Hatshepsut in their sequential order.

Because it is important to know everything we can about the events surrounding Joseph’s life, we really need to take a better look at Joseph’s pharaoh,, Amosis I. As far as can be determined there was no Amosis II. Frank J. Cosentino, in his book “The Boehm Journey To Egypt, Land of Tutankhamun,” uses this dessignation of Amosis I in the following excerpts from his book, we are mentioning this so there will nto be any concusion concerning it. From page 36 we find:

“The glory of liberating Egypt fell to Amosis I (1570-1546 B.C.), the first of theEighteenth Dynasty. His reign ushered in the New Kingdom, a period of unparalleled progress and power which was to last almost five hundred years, from 1567 B.C. to 1080 B.C. This epoh, which also is called theEmpire period, encompasses the Eighteenth through the Twentieth Dynasties.”

From page 37:

‘...Unfriendly lords who opposed Amosis or who refused to support the r of liberation were dealt with forcefully and brutally by the king, who often paused in his war with the Hyksos to defeat or punish rival nomes. This is one of the reasons it took so long to expel the Syrians (hyksos, as ‘Syrians’ might be taken as Aram), a period estimated to be more than twenty years. Finally, after years of siege upon Avaris, Delta stronghold of the Hyksos, they were dislodged and began their retreat to lower Palestine.

“Amosis I, now a great hero of Egypt, was in a positin to eliminate the feudal system, and he did. He confiscatd the lands and properties of the lords he defeated and stripped them of their peerage. Thsoe who supported him during the long Hyksos war also turned their estates over to the pharaoh in return form retnetion of their old titles and offices. All of Egypt once again was the personal property of the pharaoh.”

Page 39:

“Amosis I had continued his military campaigns in the north and south, but the greater part of his reign had been devoted to the expulsion of the Hyksos and reorganization of the state. The expansion of the empire was carried forward vigorously by his son, Amenophis I (Amenhotep I, 1546-1526 B.C.), and by th eson’s successor, Thutmosis I, 1526-1508, WHO APPEARED TO COME FROM ANOTHER LINE OF THE ROYAL HOUSE.

“Through the sixteenth centry B.C., the Egyptian armies completed the conquest of Nubia, between the First and second Cataracts and of the country of Kush, between the Second andFourth Cataracts. The armies then turned their attentinos north, to syria and Palestine, where a number of small feudal states existed. Stronger was the kingdom of Kadesh, still ruled by the Hyksos. THE ETHNIC FABRIC OF THESE SMALL STATES INCLUDED SEMITES, HITTITES, MITANNIS, HAPIRU, AND IRANIANS (not today’s Iranians). After many invasions and battles over a period of a half a century, Thutmosis I finally extended the empire into the valleys of the Euphrates, Tigris, and Orontes Rivers...”

From page 107:

“The forces of power in Egypt moved from north to south through its ancient history. Old Kingdom pharaohs (2686-2181 B.C.) Were centered below the Delta near the location of contemporary Cairo. The Middle Kingdom (2040-1674 B.C.) Established its seat of power 250 miles south. Thebes, located 425 mils below Cairo, gained supremacy in the New Kingdom (1567-1080 B.C.) Started by the great pharaoh Amosis I. Thebes remained the capital through the subsequent peiods of decadence and decline...”

Of special importance on page 39 from above, is described the “ethnic fabric” of the small city-states throughout Palestine at this particular time in history. They included Semites, Hittites, Mitannis, Hapiru, and Iranians. We are sure that this is only a partial list, but at the same time, it substantiates the Bible, Genesis 15:19-21, where it includes: Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaims, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashits and Jebusites.

These were a hodgepodge mixed-race group of people. These are the same peoples the Israelites, when entering Canaan, were given the commission to kill every man, woman and child without mercy. These are the same grup of people, when Israel neglected that command,were to become the thorns in their sides and pricks in their eyes, (Numbers 33:55) their descendants who we know today as “Jews.”

The excerpts just quoted give us a better overall picture of what was really goning on in Egypt during the period which Joseph was sold, and when later his father and brothers joined him there. All this fills in a great deal of informaton which cannot be found entirely in the Bible. The second paragrph, quoted on page 37, is especially significant as it substantiates the Scripture where Joseph imposed a 20% income tax on the Egyptians and confiscated all their land and gave it to the pharaoh. (Genesis 34:20-26) All this resulted in more power for the pharaoh to fight against the Hyksos.

In “Mummies Myth and Magic,” by Christine El Mahdy, page 86, we are told:

“The mummy of Amosis...founder of the Eighteenth dynasty and the new Kingdom, shows him to have been uncircumcised. He suffered from arthritis and died while relatively young.”

On page 87, it goes on to indicate that he died in his mid to late twenties. This could account for why he didn’t pursue after the Hyksos into Palestine. Evidently, with the death of this pharaoh the Egyptians laced direction. It also suggests that the pharaoh might have been a teenager when oseph interpreted his dream, and maybe, because of his age, why he decided to put Joseph in charge of his realm.

Amenhotep I

Upon the death of Amosis, his son, Amenhotep I, took the throne. There is not as much information on Amenhotep I as thee is on Amosis. It seems that with Amenhotep I, the Egyptiand expansion was directed toward the south after the victory over the Hyksos. In Bill Manley’s “The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Egypt,” page 61, it says:

“However, during the reign of Amenhotep I (if not before), it beame Egyptian policy to extend the southen boundary further than it had existed during the Middle Kingdom.”

The attractin to the suth was gold. Again in this same book on page 68:

“Theban authorities recognezed that the Nubian gold mines were the foundations on which Egypt could be reconstructed as a formidable commercial power. A policy of conquest directed towards the kingdom of Kush itself emerged when Amenhyotep I founded a fortified Egyptian town at Shaat, beyond the Middle Kingdom border in Mubia; the king was determined ‘to extend the boundaries of the Black Land,’ according to Ahmos-Saibana.”

Again on page 70 we read:

“There is no compelling evidence to suggest that Ahmose (Amosis I) exploited his success at Sharuhen by continuing his campaigns further into Palestine; his son and successor, Amenhotep I, appears not to have campaigned in Palestine at all.”

Maybe the reason it is difficult to find much on Amenhotep I is because he died in his early twenties, according to “Mummies Myth and Magic,” by Christine El Mahdy, page 86. One other thing which should be mentioned about him was he apparently left no male heir.

Tuthmosis I

Evidently, Tuthmosis I was the first pharaoh after Amosis to expand Egypt’s influence northward bypassing Palestine. For some insight on this, we will quote form “The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Egypt,” by Bill Manley, page 70:

“Within thirty years of Sharuhen, however, Thutmose I (Tuthmosis I) had led Egyptian armies as far as Naharin (which the Egyptians used as a synonym for Mitani {Hurrians}), and erected a stela on the banks of the Euphrates proclaiming the northern boundary of his domain. A list of place names apparently related to this campaign, inscribed on a monumental gate at Karnak, covers the area from Byblos along the coast toward Sumur, and across the mountains of Lebanon to the Orontes. The mention of Byblos is crucial: this major seaport had been the traditional point of contact between Egypt and the Levant. It is possible that Thutmose I (Tuthmosis I) avoided Palestien altogehter and moved his armies to Byblos by the sea, focussing his campaign (which may have been little more than a display of strength) inland on a region crossed by some of the major trade routes of the ancient Near East, linking the Levantine ports to Palestine, Anatolia, the lands of the king of Mittani, and beyond to Assyria.”

The next reference we are going to use is very important as it spells out the relationship of the pharaoh’s family for the next few generations. It is paramount that we understand this interrelation, or we will not completely understand the whole story. You may have to read the following quotation several times to fully comprehend it. it is from “The Boehm Journey To Egypt, Land Of Tutankhamun,” by Frank J. Cosentino, page 40:

“Tutmosis I gave special impetus to the temple building program. He instructed his brilliant architect Ineni to erect massive pylons (towered gateways) at the entrance to the Amun (Amen) temple at Karnak and two giant granite obelisks before they pylons.

“Thutmosis I had four children with his chief queen, only one of which lived beyond childhood, a girl named Hatshepsut. Among other children with lesser queens was a son named Thutmosis II who married his half-sister, Hatshepsut. The two could produce no immediate heirs but Thutmosis II fathered a son,Thutmosis III, with a concubine from his harem. The father, now king, named his son as co-regent. Thutmosis II died soon after and Thutmosis III, still a child, ascended to the throne. Hatshepsut, however, had great ambitions. At first she ruled in the name of the young king; but with guile (?) And skill she gined support from the chief viziers, nobles, comanders, and priests, thrust Thutmosis III into the brackground, and claimed co-regency by right of her birth.”

Let’s investigate Tuthmosis I from another source, as we will now be getting into some of the essential and basic elements of our story. There is a lot more to this Egyptian saga than we may have ever imagined, and we are about to find out some unusual and interesting matters of concern. For this we will quote form “Cleopatra’s Neddles,” by E.A. Wallis budge, pages 91-92:

“The Obelisk Of Thotmes I (Thutmosis I), King of Egypt About 1546 B.C., At Karnak. Thothmes I, the son of Amenhetep I (Amenhotep I) by his Queen Senseneb, began to reign about 1546 B.C., and reigned about 30 years.

On the day of his coronation, i.e., the 21^st day of the 3^rd month of the season Pert, he sent the copy of a decree to the Egyptian viceroy of Nubia, who dwelt at Elephantine, announcing his coronation and giving a list of titles that he had adopted. Soon after he ascended the throne he made a raid into Nubia; the general of his army was Aahmes, the son of Abana, a warrior who had fought against the Hyksos. The king was present at one engagement, and speared the leader of the enemy, and sailed down-stream with the dead body tied to the bow of his boat.

The authority of Egypt in Nubia at that time seems to have been effective so far as the Island of Tombos, near the head of the third Cataract (boundary differs from Cosentino). Thotmes next devoted himself to consolidating the power of Egypt in Syria, and his victorious troops conquered the shasu, a onfederation of nomad tribes, and took possession of the country of Naharina. He set up a stele at a place called Ni, near the Euphrates, to mark the limit of his kingdom in the north, and this stele was standing in the reign of his grandson, Thothmes III (Tuthmosis III). His raids in Nubia and in Syria brought him in much wealth, and a large portion of it he spent in building and repairing the temples of the great gods of Thebes and Abydos, i.e., Amen-Ra and Osiris.

“...He had two obelisks quarried at Aswan, and built a lighter nearly 00 feet long and 60 feet wide on which to transport them to Thebes, and they were set up under the directon fo the official Anni in front of another pylon; the two pylons which Thothmes (Tuthmosis) built were united by a colonnade..Thothmes I was the first king who set up obelisks in Thebes, and in view of the later religious history of the 18^th Dynasty his action seems to show that he was favorably disposed to the doctrines OF THE PRIESTHOOD OF HELIOOPOLIS (Beth-shemish, or house of Shem), and that he wished to link the cult of Ra with that of theTheban god Amen. As Usertsen I had set up a pair of obelisks before the house of Ra at Heliopolis, so Thothmes I set up a pair before a pylon of the temple of Amen.” (Amen, Hebrew for truth)

We don’t know whether or not you understand the significance of what you have just read, but this makes a connection of the god Amen-Ra of Egypt with the Priest of On (Joseph’s in-laws) at Heliopolis (Beth-shemish). If this is ture, the god Amen represents the same deity as that of the Hebrews. We doubt very much whether the writer of this book had any idea that he was making such a onnection. Also, we are sure many of us have been under the impression that an obelisk is a phallic symbol. If what Budge writes on page 19 is correct, it was the Arabs who came up with that idea. In the process of explaining the meaning of “Cleopatra’s Needles” it says in part:

“...they (the Arabs) assigned them to her (Cleopatra), with perhaps an obscene suggestion that they resembled phalli lurking in their minds.”

If it were the Arabs who gave the obelisks the meaning of phalli, that couldn’t have been the meaning to the Egyptians from the beginning. No doubt, obelisks have become known generally for, and adopted as phallic symbols as a secondary meaning at various times in history. On the Internet ther was information on “Phallic Representatons” udner the title “Women And Gender In ancient Egypt,” by The Kelsey Museum of Archaeology which exhibits varius Egyptian phallic figures and amulets, and there are no obelisks among them. It would seem, if an obelisk were a phallic symbol, they would have placed one at the top of the list. In the book “Cleopatra’s Needles,” by E.A. Wallis Budge, page 14 it says:

“...it is probable that many of them were set up as funerary mounments, and were intended to indicate regenration,new life, stability, and perhpas resurrection.”

On page 6 of this same book it explains how obelisks were generally set up in pairs. Very seldom was one placed alone. It would be understandable, if one was placed alone, how one might imagine a phillic meaning, but how can one conceive such a meaning where they are placed in pairs?

Tuthmosis II

There is not a lot of information to pass along on Tuthmosis II except he was the husband of Queen Hatshepsut. Tuthmosis II and his queen were half brother-sister. While Hatshepsut was of royal blood, Tuthmosis II was not. For more details on this, we will quote from “Cleopatra’s Needles,” by E.A. Wallis Budge, page 98:

“Hatshepsut was probably associated with her father, Thotmes I (Tuthmosis I), in the rule of the kingdom during the last few years of his life, and her power became greatly increased when she married her brother, ThothmesII, either before or immediately after her father’s death. Her husband died after a short, ineffective reign, and as her nephew, who later was known as Thothmes III, was then a child, she undertook to administer the kingdom.”

Pharaoh Hatshepsut

Because there is more material on hatshepsut than can be presented in the rest of this study, it will be necessary to save it for later. Actually we did cover Hatshepsut somewhat previously, but there is more we should consider. To start with, in a quote from the book “The Boehm Journey To Egypt, Land Of Tutankhamun,” by Frank J. Cosentino, page 120, we read:

“It will be recalled tha Hatshepsut was the first great queen of Egypt. She married Thutmosis II and after his death seized the throne from Thutmosis III, who after Hatshepsut’s demise was to become one of Egypt’s greatest warrior-kings. To secure her name in history and to prove herself equal to all the male pharaohs before her, she embarked on ambitious building programs during her twenty-year rule (1489-1469 B.C.).”

Princess Hatshepsut was the only surviving child of Tuthmosis I and his queen. As there is no word in the ancient Egyptian language for “queen,” the meaning was simply “king’s great wife.” Had Tuthmosis I had a son, he would have been in lie to inherit the throne from his father. With Hatshepsut being a female, and no others contending for the throne, it could pass through her to whomever she might marry. There was a major flaw in this arrangment, as it left an opening for non-royal blood to gain the throne.

In the Eighteenth Egyptiand Dynasty this happened several times. In fact, Tuthmosis Ii, the half-brother who Hatshepsut married, is a case in point. The exact system of choosing a new king is not precisely known, but, in the 18^th Dynasty, ti seems that if there was no son to reeive the honor, it was passed on through the oldest female, and in turn to her husband. The difference in the case with Hatshepsut, she took the throne herself after her husband died. It was probably a matter guardianship at first until Tuthmosis III bcame of age, but Hatshepsut evidently decided to remain on the throne, denying Tthmosis III his seat. In the end, this precipitated abitter battle between Hatshepsut and Tuthmosis III.

In Egypt, the pharaoh often had many wives, and in some cases, married a half-sister. All this made the process of passing on the throne rather complex. Upon th edeath of Tuthmosis I, his son Tuthmosis II, by a minor wife, was married to his half-sister, Hatshepsut. By marrying Hatshepsut, it established Tuthmosis II’s right to the throne which lasted for twenty-two unexceptional years. When Tuthmosis II died, he left a daughter by Hatshepsut and a son, Tuthmosis III, by a monor wife. Hatshepsut then ruled seven years as regent for the young boy. After this time, Hatshepsut took it upon herself to change her title from “Queen” to “King.”

Tuthmosis III

There has been a queston in the past whether Tuthmosis III was a son of Tuthmosis I or II. The book “Cleopatra’s Needles,” by E.A. Wallis Budge, page 126 says:

“Each has shown that we must hold Thothmes III to be the son of Thothmes II and not Thotmes I.”

For information on Tuthmosis III, we will again quote from “Cleopatra’s Needles,” by E.A. Wallis Budge, pages 125-126:

“The Reign of Thothmes III, 1500-1447 B.C. The parentage of Thothmes III (Tuthmosis III), the greatst of the kings of the 18^th Dynasty, and probably the greatest of all the kings of Egypt, has been the subject of animated discussion for many years past, and even now Egyptologists are not agreed about the matter. There is no doubt that he was associated with the great Queen Hatshepsut in the rule of the kingdom, but what was his relationship to her/ Some say that he was her half-brother...”

There was a series on The Learning Channel entitled “Secret of The Pharaohs.” The first the three showings were on the 18^th Dynasty of Egypt which we have been considering as being contemporary with the Israelite captivity in Egypt. The second in this series as about the building of the Great Pyramid of Giza. Recently they have found a buried city near there which they believe was used to house the workers that built it.

The third in the series did not relate to our study. There was also a program on The Learning Chanel entitled “Egypt’s Lost city” which was about Akhenaten’s city known today as Tell el-Amarna. About a year ago, we caught a four-part series entitled “Egyptian Mummies.” Part four of that series was about Tutankhamen.

This is simply amazing as we no more than got a good start on the subject of Egypt and all this information is being addressed on television. Also, we found a book entitled “The Bible Is History,” by Ian Wilson. This 1999 book is simply outstanding and filled with useful and fantastic information. Also, we were advised by a person that there was a good article in the January, 2001 “National Geographic” entitled “Ancient Ashkelon.” As you may see, with all this new information, in addition to our previous research, we have been qite busy.

This may come as a surprise to you but it appears that the Hyksos probably were descendants of Cain. If so, we are right back to the subject of Two Seedline, and there is no other subjet in all Scripture more important. The following is what we had to say in a previous study:

“At their height, the Hyksos occupied the land of the Hurrians, Carchemish, Syria, Palestine and much of the northern part of Egypt. By inhabiting the Delta area of Egypt, they were in control of all commerce on the nile. This cut off the remainder of Egypt almost entirely, from commercial trade and the rest of the then known world. The Hyksos could sit in their fortress at Avaris and all the shots up and down the Nile.

“These Hyksos were a very strange people, desireing to set up a government like that of the Egyptians. It makes one wonder why they didn’t set up a government like they had wherever they came from, wherever that was. They seem to be a kind of chameleon type of people, adapting themselves to their surroundings. We have a cameleon type of people today living in the United States. Pretending to be of the White Race, and passing themsleves off as such; changing their names to fit the territory.

“Some students believe the Hyksos came from the Caucasus or even Central Asia. At least, as far as the Egyptians were concerned, the Hyksos were an Asiatic people. The Hyksos seem to have been active merchants. They introduced int Egypt a new system of weights and balances. Does this eem to ring a bell of any kind? It kid of makes one wonder who the Hyksos people were. We can, though, be quite sure they were not Egyptian or Israelite.”

We are now going to consider some evidence which powerfully suggests the Hyksos were indeed descendants of Cain. We will start by quoting from the article in “National Geographic,” of January, 2001 entitled “Ashkelon Ancient City of The Sea,” page 78:

“As Canaanite Ashkelon prospered, its army grew strong. Historians have long known that around 1650 B.C., a mysterious group of warriors called the Hyksos invaded the Nile Delta and ruled it for a centry. No one knew where the Hyksos, which means ‘foreing rulers’ in ancient Egypt, came from. Recent excavations at Avaris, the Hyksos capital in Egypt, have produced artifacts identical to those found in Ashkelon, leading Stager to propose that the Hyksos were actually Canaanites and that many came from around Ashkelon.

“Even before the Hyksos conquered the delta, the Egyptians were hving trouble with the Canaanites. Pharaohs of the 12^th Dynasty (1938-1755 B.C.) Cursed three kings of Ashkelon in so-called execration tests. Scribes would write the names of the kings onceramic bowls or human figurines, and the pharaoh would smash them to magially destroy their power.”

It was just such an execration was performed by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 19:10-11), where he took a baked clay bottle, smashed it,and pronounced that Judah and Jerusalem will be broken, never to be whole again. Now the Judeo-Christian clergy of today claim this broken bottle will be put bck together again when they calim the “Jews” regurning to Jerusalem is a fulfillment of Bible prophey. That’s a little off the topic, but we thought we would inject that one in here as long as we are speaking of “execrations.” To follow-up on this last quotatin concerning the Hyksos, we will quote from “The Bible Is History,” by Ian Wilson, page 39:

“As pictorial evidence of how such peoples could and did make tolerated infiltrations, an 8-foot-long tomb painting from this period, found at Beni Hasan, south of Cairo, depicts the arrival at Egypt’s eastern frontier of eight Asiatic men, four women, three children, two donkeys, an ibex and a gazelle. They were apparently part of a group of thirty-seven Hyksos coming to trade in eye make-up. The men’s hair-styles are strongly reminiscent of that of mysterius Ankhu statue. One of the weapons they are carrying is unmistakably a Canaanite duck-bill-shaped axe of the kind that Bietak found in the Tell el-Dab’a graves...”

The following is from “The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible,” volume 3, page 782:

“Kenites: Meaning (metalworkers, smiths). Clan or tribal name of semi-nomadic peoples of South Palestine and Sinai. The ramaic and Arabic etymologies of the root gyn how that it has to dow with metal and metal work (thus the Hebrew word from this root, “lance”). This probably indicates that the Kenites were metal workers, especially since Sinai and wadi ‘Arabah were rich in highgrade copper ore. W.F. Albright has pointed to the Beni Hassan mural in Egypt (19^th century B.C.) As an illustration of such a WONDERING GROUP OF SMITHS. This mural depicts thirty-six men, women and children in characteristic Semitic dress leading, along with other ANIMALS, donkeys laden with MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, weapons and an item which Albright has identiefied as a BELLOWS. He has further noted that Lemech’s three children (Genesis 4:19-22) were responsible for HERDS (Jabal), MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS (Jubal), and METAL WORK (Tubal-Cain, or Tubal, THE SMITH), the three occupatons which seem most evident in the mural.”

We captalized the various marks of Cain in the above quote. If you will remember, Cain and his descendants were to become famous as wanderers and vegabonds (tent dwellers). They were to become famous as workers in metal; they were to become famous as musicians; they were to become somewht involved in cattle. All these traits of Cain can be found in Genesis 4:20-24. These various characteristics have followed Cain (the “Jews”) down to this very day. Neither the National Geographic nor Ian Wilson in his “The Bible Is History” saw the connection with the Hyksos, but W.F. Albright (an accomplished archaeologist and Bible scholar) comprehends the connection very effectively, and is right on the money.

The Hyksos’ Duck-Billed Axe

Being metal workers, the Hyksos developed a very vicious battle weapon called a duck-billed axe. Pharaoh Seqenenre Tao of the 17^th Egyptian Dynasty fell victim to such a weapon. In the bokk “Mummies Myth And Magic,” pages 84-85 there is a gruescome looking picture of his mummy. There are fice nasty gashes in his skull. On pages 84-85 there are these comments:

“Seqenenre Tao was a ruler of Upper Egypt, in the south. He rebelled against the foreign Hyksos kings who ruled Egypt from their capital in thedelta. That Seqenenre died a violent death is all too apparent from his mummy. Looking at the damage to his skull, one can imagine the ferocity of the blows he must have endured that resulted in his death...Among the cache of royal mummies found in 181 at Deir elBahri was the damaged and poorly embalmed body of Seqenenre Tao, a ruler in Luxor during the troubled Seventeenth Dynasty. One of his sons, Kamose, is credited with the final expulsion of the foreign Hyksos rulers; another, called Ahmose, founded the Eighteenth Dynasty and ecame the first pharaoh of the New Kingdom.”

Ian Wilson in his “The Bible is History,” page 41 comments:

“As generally agreed by those who have examined his mummy, he died in terrible agony from having been hacked about the head by the very Hyksos, duck-billed type of axe that Bietak and his helpers found in the grave at Tel elDab’a, a type also carried by the seemingly peaceful traders depicted in the Beni Hasan wall-painting.”

Again, Ian Wilson speaks of the duck-billed Hyksos type of axe on page 68:

“It was this same weapon that is believed to have enabled the Hyksos/Canaanites to gain control so easily of Lower Egypt, until the Egyptians developed their own equivalents and turned the tables on them.”

What we like about Ian Wilson’s book is that he equates the Hyksos with the Canaanites. He terms them as “Hyksos/Canaanites.” He makes it clear what he means when he says on page 38:

“...many of the very same texts make clear that these were not any specific ethnic group but instead trouble-making mercenaries of mixed origin.”

Here we have a good example of the description of the Bible passages found in Genesis 15:19-21. Listed among this mixed group are th eKenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perrizzites, Rephaims, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashits and Jebusites. The Kenites among these were the descendants of Cain. Canaanite is a general term for many peoples. All these peoples had mixed until the blood of Cain flowed in all their veins. In Genesis 15:19-21 are listed ten nations and they race-mixed so much that in Deuteronomy 7:1-2 there are only seven. The Kenites, Kenizzites and Rephaims were completely absorbed by the other nations of this group from which the “Jews” are extracted. The Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible,” abridged by Ralph Earle, page 38:

“The Kenites. Here are ten nationsmentioned though afterwards reckoned but seven; see Deuteronomy 7:1; Acts 13:19. Probably some of them which existed in Abram’s time had been BLENDED with others before the time of Moses, so that seven only out of the ten, then remained.”

In the “Peake’s Commentary on the Bible,” page 116 we find this about this mixed group of nations spoken of in Genesis 15:19-21:

“When the Israelites entered Canaan they found there a VERY MIXED population generally designated by the term Amorite or Canaanite.”

The next mention of the descendants of Cain is found in 1 Chronicles 2:55:

“And the FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.”

The whole 2^nd chapter of 1^st Chronicles, from verse 3 on, is the lineage of Judah. Thent acked on at thend of the chapter (verse 55) is this group of people who were actually descendants of Cain known as Kenites and having no blood connection at all with Judah. A footnote in “The Complete Word Study King James Bible,” by Spiros Zodhiates, page 1055 says:

“They became incorporated into the tribe of Judah.”

The word Kenite here is #7017 in Strong’s Concordance. Actually the numbers for Cain are both #7014 and #7017. You will notice here in 1^st Chronicles 2:55, they are alled, “the families of the sribes.” They were sribes at this time and they were scribes in Yahshua’s time; they are the same people.

At this time we are going to quote from “The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible,” volume 3, pages 783-784. As we quotef rom this same article on the “Kenites” above, this will be the second quote from the same article:

“The early monarchy. During this period a signifiant concentration of Kenites was located in the southern Judean territory. This is clear frm 1 Samuel 15:6 cited above and also from David’s relations with them.”

Again, a third quote from the same article:

“Postexilic referenes. In 1 Chronicles 2:55 the FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES living at Jabaz are said to be Kenites. Apparently, during the kingdom and exile periods, certain Kenites had given up nomadic smithing and had taken on a more sedentary, but equally honorable PROFESSION OF SCRIBE.”

“Peake’s Commentary on the Bible,” page 114, says about the Kenites:

“The etymology of the name suggest THAT THEY WERE SMITHS OR ARTIFICERS, a theory which is supported by the association with the Wadi ‘Arabah, where there were copper desposits which had been worked by the Egyptians since the middle of the 3^rd millennium.”

Again in the “Peake’s Commentary on the Bible,” page 818, we find more on the name of the Kenites:

“The name CAIN is generally taken by Semitic philologists to mean ‘smith,’ and regarded as the patronymic of the KENITE CLAN OF SMITHS.”

The “Jamieson, Fausset & Brosn Commentary On The Whole Bible” ays on the Kenites, page 293:

“THE FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES; either civil or ecclesiastical officers of the Kenite origin, WHO ARE HERE CLASSIFIED WITH THE TRIBE OF JUDAH, NOT AS BEING DESCENDED FORM IT, but as dwellers within its territory, in a measure INCORPORATED with its people.”

The “Matthew Pool’s Commentary On The Holy Bible,” has this to say on the Kenites, volume 1, page 779:

“The SCRIBES; either civil, WHO WERE PUBLIC NOTARIES, WHO WROTE AN SIGNED LEGAL INSTRUMENTS; OR ECLESIASTICAL...and are here mentioned not as if they were of the tribe of Judah, but becauwe they dwelt among them, and probably were allied to them by marriages, and so in a manner incorporated with them. Which dwelt, or rather, dwelt; Hebrew, were dwellers. For theother translation, which dwelt, MAY SEEM TO INSINUATE THT THESE WERE DESCENDANTS OF JUDAH, WHICH THEY WERE NOT; but this tranlation ONLY SIGNIFIES COHABITATON WITH THEM, for which cause they are here named with them.”

Hyksos Return to Canaan

We do not agree with Ian Wilson when he makes the following comment in his book “The Bible is History,” on page 71:

“Yet if it was not the Egyptians, Kenyon’s favored candidates; the land-hungry Hyksos/Canaanite invaders renturing from their settlement in Egypt; are hardly more plausible. After all, the last thing a group of this kind would do, would be to destroy and abandon a city they had fought for in order to make it a new home. This would be particlarly the case with Jericho, which has one of the best water suppies anywhere in Israel, including a natural spring pumping out water at the rate of 17 3/4 gallons per second.”

After they Hyksos were successfully driven out of Egypt, they apparently returned to Canaan. Evidently, one of the places they returned to was Jericho. We belive we would rather favor the view of Kenyon than Wilson, that it was from the Hyksos returning to their former position at Jericho. From all the evidence we have seen the Hyksos occupied a very wide area at the zenth of their expansion. If you will remember, we stated at the start of this study:

“At their height, the Hyksos occupied the land of the Hurrians, Carchemish, Syria, Palestine and much of the northern part of Egypt.”

At this point, in their retreat, the Hyksos were probably simply returning to an area they had formerly occupied. We would rather believe the Hyksos knew they needed a strong position and that they rebuilt Jericho to defend themselves from the threat of advancing Egyptians. No doubt, they were still there when the Israelites under Joshua’s leadership finally destroyed the city. Future archaeological evidence may force us to change our position on this, but for lack of better evidence, we tend to believe a scenario of the Hyksos retreating to Jericho fits the overall picture quite well.

Pharaoh Amosis did not pursue the Hyksos any great distance after he initially defeated them and drove them out of Egypt;

“After three years of seige, the Egyptians were finally victorious, slaughtering many, if not nearly all of the Hyksos. No doubt, the Egyptians also took many of the Hyksos as slaves. Thus, the Theban government regained control over trade between Egypt and Palestine. The Egyptians under Amosis did not pursue the Hyksos on into Palestine at this time. It ws some 61 years later that Thutmosis III advanced into that area.”

Where Did The Hyksos Come From?

For this we will get back to the article “Ashkelon, Ancient City Of The Sea,” in the “Natonal Geographic,” of January, 2001, page 74:

“The Canaanites, a people who probaboly originated in eastern Syria, had begun migratingdown the Mediterranean coast about seven centuries earlier. ‘They came by the boatload,’ says Stager, ‘They had masster craftsmen and a clear idea of what they wanted to build; big fortified cities.’

“The Canaanites made Ashkelon a major center of trade, exporting wine and olive oil through the easter Mediterranean. Stager’s team recently found evidence of the cosmoplitan nature of theCannite Ashkelon; part of the 13^th century tablet used to teach scribes languges. The tablet had one column of Canaanite words, which would have matched up with two or three adjacent columns containing equivalent words in different languages. Based on complete tablets found in Syria, linguists suspect that one column would have been a Semitic language called Akkadian, another an unrelated tongue, possibly Hurrian or Hittite.”

From the description of Ashkelon aboe, we can clearly see it was a commercial center. One might describe it as the New York of its day. Essential to trade would be the necessity of understanding and conversing in all the various languages with whom one might be doing the trading. No doubt, these Hyksos-Canaanites were related to the people we know today as “Jews.” For another two references on how the Hyksos invaded Egypt and Pharaoh Amosis I finally drove them back out are found an ddescribed in the book “The Boehm Journey To Egypt, Land Of Tutankhamun,” on pages 35-36:

“During the Thirteenth Dynasty a force from the area of Palestine and syria attacked and conuered nothern Egypt. These people, probably Syrians who ruled the eastern Mediterranean, were called Hyksos. It is not know how long the Hyksos ruled northern and middle Egypt. Some historians estimate as long as sixty-six years...from the Fourtheenth through the seventeenth dynasties...There are varied assessments as to the extent of the destruction and exploitation practiced by the conquerers. Building inscriptions show that the foreigners enjoyed being Eytptianized and even adopted thepharaonic style and titles. No doubt conventional progress remaind inhert, but the civilization seems to have held together. In fact, the regime at Thebes in the south retained a large measure of independence as the Hydsos were able to extend their rule only to the point about midway between Memphis and Thebes...

“

This all seems to fit the Bible account quite well. Not only did all these peoples migrate into Palestine, but Egypt made inroads there also. For this story, we will quote again “Archaeology And The Bible,” by George A. Barton, pp. 108-109:

Egyptians also came to Palestine during this period. “The tale of Sinuhe relates the adventures of a man who fled to Palestine inthe year 1970 B.C., and who reached the land of Kedem, or the East, which apparently lay to the east of the Jordan. It is referred to several times in the Old Testament. (See “Genesis 29:1; Judges 6:3, 33; 7:12; 8:10; Job 1:3) Sinuhe thee enteed the service of an Amorite chieftan, Ammienshi, married his eldest daugher, became ruler of a portion of his land, and lived there for many years. He finally returned to Egypt and wrote an account of his adventures. The region was also called by Sinuhe and other Egytpians Upper Retenu, a name which they also applied to all the higher prts of Syria and Palestine. Retenu is philologically equivalent to Lotan (Genesis 36:20, 22, 29; 1 Chronicles 1:38, 39) and Lot (Genesis 11:27; 12:4) When Sinuhe arrived in Kedem he found other Egyptians already there. Ammienshi was ell acquainted with Egyptians. There was apparently considerable trade with Egypt at this time. Men from Palestine often went here for htis purpose. Such traders are pictured on an Egyptian tomb of this period. Trade with Egypt is also shown to have existed by the discovery of Egyptian scarabs of the time of the Middle Kingdom in the edcavations of

Gezer, Jericho, Taanach, and Megiddo.”