All the biblical literature can be found among other cultures where it was written down thousands of years prior to the records in the Bible. The records written down by others are disregarded as being the originals because the Church states that since God himself gave the Tradition we read in the Bible to Moses, it is the correct rendition. Moses does not belong as early in the records because he came much later but with that type of an argument we have to remove some of the darkness from around this subject. The start of the tale of Moses is a tale quite familiar to the people of the area at the time of Moses, the boy floating down the river, being rescued and raised by an adoptive parent. When the story of Sargon was added to the story of Moses we do not know but about 420 B.C.E. would be my guess.
For the sake of argument ,the figure Moses was indeed raised in the royal court of the time. The name can be Translated as "is borne" in Egyptian. The name also means "emerging serpent" in Sumerian. Moses commits a murder, escapes to the desert, and meets a god who claims to be the god of his forefathers is how the biblical tale goes. God told Moses that his name is "I am That I am" Ex 3:14. "I am That I am" was not the epithet of any of the Canaanite or Sumerian Gods. He was not the intended God of the Moses of the Bible, He was the God of the Egyptian Pharaoh Ahmoses (same exact spelling as Moses) who in 1567 B.C.E. expelled the Hyksos from Egypt. "I am That I am" was the epithet of the Egyptian God Amon-Re.
Amon-Re, also known as Amen-Re, was the most powerful God of the Egyptian Pharaohs at this time in Egyptian history. Now what is this Egyptian God doing between the pages of the Hebrew Bible as the God revealed to Moses? On the other hand, you might ask what a burning bush has to do in the religion of the Hebrews and here the answer is nothing. The burning bush has an awfully lot to do with a religious order worshipping the Sun God Amen-Re and nothing with the Hebrew religion. This bush that burned and burned but was not consumed is a parallel to the Sun.
What is incredible with the fact that this Egyptian God was the God encountered by Moses is that the editors who wrote this part of the Bible were not aware of the fact that this was who it was. The Greeks were aware of Amon-Re, they probably knew his epithet, yet this is not certain as far as about 350 B.C.E. among the Israelites but this part of the Bible could not have been written much earlier than that or it would have been obvious who the God was. Moses must have known who Amon-Re was since he supposedly was raised in the Egyptian courts, and he would never have promoted an Egyptian God for the Canaanites. But who was Moses really? A Hebrew basket case or a rewritten legend of an Egyptian Pharaoh?
Tatian, a disciple of Irenaeus in the second century C.E. writes that the Exodus in fact occurred during the reign of Ahmoses. The most striking evidence is however found in "The Stomata" by the father of current Christian thought, Clement of Alexandria. Clement also states that the Exodus took place during the reign of the Egyptian Pharaoh Ahmoses. Further, Clement states that when Moses told the Egyptian King Chenephres that the Israelites had to leave, the king wanted to know which God had sent him.
He is told the name of the God and, according to Clement, the King topples over. The remarkable fact is not that Chenophren toppled over when he heard the name of the God, it is that Moses who left during the reign of Ahmoses tells this to the King of the Hyksos and not the Egyptian Pharaoh Ahmoses.
There is only one explanation. Ahmoses and Moses are identical. The God whom he said sent him was the God of the Egyptian Pharaohs, known as "I am that I am." This God could not either be depicted in human terms by the Egyptians and no images could be made of him. The Egyptians made images of Amon-Re, but these were not thought of as true replicas for the Egyptians called him the God whom no one, not even the Gods knew what he looked like. This is not what is important. The illustration that the Israelites borrowed famous people from every other culture in the area to add emphasis to their tales is what is important.
When looking at the biblical record, we see Moses refuses to do "I AM's" dirty business in Egypt. I am asks if Aaron is not his brother. Now Aaron was the brother who made the Golden calf which ticked this God off so incredibly. The golden calf was a Canaanite symbol and not Egyptian. Now Aaron some claim was inserted into the tale of the Exodus at a later date to validate the Israeli priesthood. What did the God if he was Amen-Re desire Moses to do in the court of the Pharaoh? It all makes sense, not the same sense as we are used to, but sense. The god desired for Ahmoses to reunite the Egyptian kingdom.
Exodus 4:24 states: "And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him and sought to kill him." This does not make sense. The Lord in the Bible sent Moses to get the Israelite's out of Egypt and then met him at an inn while he was on the road and attempted to kill him. This is a remnant undoubtedly of the earlier Israelite religion which did not have just the one God. The God which here met (Ah)Moses at the inn to kill him would have been the Canaanite or Israelite God, which was the same God the Hyksos worshipped.
Exodus 6:3 states: "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob knew god as God almighty (El Shaddai) but by the name Jehovah they did not know me. Jehovah is just another way to write Yahweh and Yahweh is the four consonants YHWH which by the Canaanites was written Yawwu. So in the one place, the God was Amen-Re and just a few verses later it became Jehovah. Which one was the original?
Ex 22:10-14 states taht the God of Moses is also said to be the God of Balaam, which indicates that Moses worshipped Baal. El was the head of the Canaanite pantheon, but now is where the confusion comes into the picture. The god El/En-Lil seems to have been confused also by the desert travelers with El/En-Ki. Here we are at a later time in the story and the people at this time are confusing various other Gods of the Canaanite-Sumerian pantheon with the God they should be worshipping.
Judges 4:11 states that the Kenites, the descendants of Cain, are the ones who revealed the worship of YHWH to Moses as their ancestor God. If the Flood had wiped out all of Mankind except those of the ark there would not have been any Kenites. But as we now understand, it was Gnosis which was to have been wiped out by implants.
The return of the Israelites to the worship of the god of the Kenites completes the circle. Cain was the son of Yaldabaot and the other line was the Son of Man. And now they worship the creator Archon YHWH/Yaldabaot.
The God of Moses, YHWH got his divinity from replacing the God of Abraham, Adam, etc. To push away one god, and replace him by another was commonly practiced by many. Look for example at Constantine. His God was usurped by the Christian God mainly because wearing the banner of this new God of his Mother, he won at war.
There is no need here to go into the story of the escape of Moses from Egypt. It is not historical, and instead of the mythological story related in Exodus, we will take a brief look at what really happened.
1 Kings 6:1 states: "And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel..."
Solomon ruled Israel about 1,000 B.C. No exact time can be given, but this would be about right. If we were to go back another 480 years, and then possibly 40 for the sojourn in the desert we are back to 1,520 B.C. This contrasts sharply with the experts who say the exodus took place between 1,200-1,300 B.C. But the experts know they can in no way substantiate an exodus from Egypt 1,500 years before Christ. The reason is the Egyptians ruled Palestine from 1,567 until about 1,250 B.C.E.
Who left Egypt about the year 1,500 B.C? There are absolutely no records anywhere in Egypt of the Israelites, the plagues they caused, turning river to blood, an escape from Egypt or anything which is depicted in the Bible. The Egyptians did not admit their failure some say. The Bible states the Exodus happened about 1,500 B.C. not 200 years or so later. There is an escape two hundred years earlier from Egypt!
The Canaanite race known as Hyksos were the rulers of parts of Egypt from about 1674 B.C.E. until about 1,567 B.C.E. (The about's given by experts are here too exact, as nothing is that certain in the area at this period in the history. It is as if they are attempting to deny the obvious connection between the Hyksos and exodus).
The Hyksos princes who fled Egypt about 1,567 B.C. left the eastern delta of the Egyptians and went east to Palestine. When the Egyptians started fighting the Hyksos, there are on records told that the Nile was so full of blood one could not drink of it. A person might be called a heretic for exposing the lies of the popular held record. If one who desires to know the truth and whose object is to separate fact from fiction is a heretic, I will proudly be one.
The Egyptians chased after their enemies the Hyksos. This was followed by many military conflicts and many a city in Palestine was laid in ruins at this time. Cities such as Hazier, Jerusalem, Jericho, Hebron and Shilo were then built up again after the wars, but many such as Ai were not, and Jericho and others were just a shallow remnant of what they had been before the Egyptian conflict. By about 1,550 B.C., virtually all of Palestine was under the yoke of the Egyptians. If the record of the Bible is then correct, Moses would have left Egypt to go to a Palestine which was under the Egyptians.
But it was not Moses who left Egypt. It was the Hyksos. They were driven by the Egyptians out of Egypt and killed on the way. Jericho, which is so vividly described when it was taken by the Israelites, was never destroyed by the Israelites and the reason will become clear.
First of all, the time in the Bible here given is wrong, it was not 480 years but 490 years. 490 years to the Israelites were of old sacred. It was seven weeks of seventy years each, which made the same 490 years we see later in Daniel. This indicated a very long holy time rather than an exact account of years. The Moses who saw the burning bush and was told by his God to go to the Pharaoh was the Egyptian Pharaoh Ahmoses. The Pharaoh he was to see was the other Egyptian Pharaoh at the time, who was a Canaanite now known as a Hyksos. Ahmoses drove the Hyksos out of Egypt and reunited the two kingdoms. When, after the Persian invasion, the Israelites wrote down their history, they borrowed the story and rewrote it to pat themselves on the back. The Egyptians conquered all of Palestine at the time they pursued the Hyksos. Palestine was then under the rule of the Egyptians until about 1,250 which is when the historians would have us think the Israelites left Egypt to go to Palestine and establish their kingdom. There were wars in Palestine at about this time, and a people was driven out of Palestine, but it was not the Canaanites and Palestinians as the biblical authors would have us believe 750 years later. As is now abundantly clear by archeological evidence, it was the Egyptians who were driven out of Palestine by a coalition of native Palestinians of whom the Israelites would have been a small force. The Canaanites would have been a large race, etc. Let us look at the records about the Egyptian occupation of Palestine and the ensuing history.
The occupation by the Egyptians caused the Canaanite culture to decline somewhat. There was subsequent rebellion of Egyptian rule in about 1,285 in the Jordan valley during the reign of Rameses II. This would then have been about the time the Church assert Moses lived. In order to fit the story of the Israelites into the chronological order of Near Eastern history this was the only vacant spot.
From an Egyptian Stele, the successor of Rameses II, Merneptah 1,213-1,203 conducted a campaign in Canaan where he met an insignificant tribe known as Israelites, and this is the only time the Israelites are mentioned in Egyptian literature. Merneptah conquered Ashkelon, Geezer, Yenoam, and one of the tribes in Yenoam is the Israelites mentioned. 1 Kings 9:16 Joshua 10:33 1 Chr. 14:16 Judges 14:19, 1 Sam:6:17, 2 Sam 1:20 are all places where this is substantiated.
The Philistines were one of the peoples of the Sea mentioned by the Egyptians, and contrary to Biblical reports, they did not live in the area of Israel prior to the advent of the Israelites. Rather, they were there at the same time as the Israelites. This only indicates the Palestinian people were a part of the same coalition which the Israelites were a part of.
Slaves and concubines were brought from Palestine in the days here spoken off which allegedly was after the time of the Exodus of the Hyksos from Egypt to Palestine. From the time the Egyptians captured Palestine, they would have brought slaves back to Egypt. So there could have been some Israelite slaves in Egypt who later escaped, but there were not enough Israelites in Canaan to form a real army. The allegation that an army of people escaped as is depicted in Exodus is not possible by the wildest adjustment of the data to fit the mind. Hapirus are a different story than the Israelites. They were people without citizenship, and the Amarna documents mention the Hapiru and the danger of an attack by them.
Many Hapirus hired themselves out as mercenaries. A great many of them were located at Sachem. Josh 20:7, 24:32, 24:1,25. Judge.9:23,45 1 King 12:1-19 Jer. 44:5-7. The trouble with identifying the Hapirus with the Hebrews is that they were known. Their worship practices were known and, as other Canaanites, their forms of worship does not agree with the forms of worship depicted in the Bible.
On the other hand, the Israelites were an extremely small tribe. No one knew them very well or their worship practices. The trouble came when archeology started digging up the original material in places like Sumer showing the original Sumerian material had been doctored up by the authors of the Bible to depict stories entirely different than their original intent.
The decisive blow was the discovery of the tablets at Ugarit. The Christian authors could not have known the material about the Babylonians and the Canaanites which they so carefully burned was still buried all along, and would eventuallybe found.
The most devastating material of all of the Near Eastern originated religions which include Christians, Jews and Islamics is yet to be discovered. If a prophesy in the Nag Hammadi documents holds true, this should be found around 2,003 A.D. After this material is found, the Gnostic truth will see a resurgence and a new "golden age" will ensue. Since we have the material from Nag-Hammadi there are no reasons to wait.
At About 1,500 B.C., Accadian was the main language of all the people of the Palestine-Israel area. The dates of destruction of the cities in Jerusalem strongly contradicts the Biblical data, and so does the sizes of the cities.
Jericho for example was at the time of the Israelites alleged invasion just a poor village town whose feat of conquest by a group of bandits would have been an easy task. When the Egyptians attacked Jericho about 1,550 B.C., it was however a stronghold whose walls were well fortified. The Hyksos after they fled Egypt held up in Jericho which was the reason for the city being sacked.
Theories show the Israelites to have emerged from various groups, such as the Hapiru and Shashu. The Shashu are known from Egyptian sources where they are referred to as Yahu, from the worship of their God YHWH/(Yawwu).
And YHWH could very well have been worshipped by several tribes of the Canaanites. These Canaanites would also have been worshipping Baal when he was not in the underworld. You see, YHWH was the Canaanite God Yammu who ruled on earth when Baal was absent.
At ancient Israelite High places (1 Kings 14:23), bronze figurines of bulls were found. The Bull symbolized the Canaanite and Syrian god Baal and would indicate the historicity of the worship practice of the Israelites. The tale of the Exodus needs to be radically revised.
Canaanites as well as Sumerians and the people of Mari saw the sea as having a divine nature. Yammu was the Canaanite God of the sea, and while he was not identical to En-Ki the Sumerian God of the sea, the Israelites possibly adopted Yammu as their interpretation of En-Ki.
The temples of Baal and YHWH were furnished in like manner with exotic woods. There was the much discussed window where Mot could have entered to do battle with Baal. But the temples were identical. In the tablets at Ugarit, we learn the simple reason for this. When Baal was defeated by Mot, El, the chief Deity of the Canaanite pantheon, permitted his son Yammu to take over the temple of Baal.
Joshua 24:2 states: "... your forefathers worshipped other Gods and Nahor lived from of old on the other side of Euphrates." Now we can see that what these forefathers talked about are not only the Sumerians which existed prior to Abraham. They are all the forefathers prior to about 420 B.C.E.
Jeremiah 11:10 states that they went back to the worship practices of their forefathers. Yes they did indeed. When Baal, after seven years (or one season) in the underworld due to his defeat at the hands of Mot, returned to lay claim to his temple, his worshippers also returned, and the jealous Yammu was left in the lurch.
Jeremiah 11:13 states: "For according to thy cities were thy Gods." In the days prior to Abraham, all cities in Sumer had a certain God which was responsible for that city. En-Lil was one of these Gods and he was still by the Canaanites worshipped at the time of Ugarit. He was now the God El also known as Elu. En-Ki was another God of the Sumerians worshipped at one of their cities. He would have been worshipped by some Canaanites early on. Later those who worshipped En-Ki would have switched to the worship of En-Ki's son Marduk who got such prominence in the Near East for a time. When En-Ki again was worshipped in the form of Yammu, it was a confusion. Yammu was not the same God.
The Canaanites which took over the rule after they chased the Egyptians out of Palestine were together with the Palestinians and other natives, indeed an illustrious group of people. The Canaanites developed Tyre and many other great cities during this period in history.
Archeological finds negate the Biblical traditions regarding Edom, Moab and Amorite Kings. Why the religion which developed after the Persians permitted the Israelites to return to Palestine and rebuild their temple needed to correct and modify so much of their history is a bit of a mystery. All the changes could not have been necessary unless the Israelites, when they developed their new religion, adopted an awful lot of features from Zoroastrian thought.
The influence of Zoroastrianism is obvious in Israelite worship as well as in Christianity. We do not today know the terms by which the Israelites were permitted to return from exile. If those terms were that they rewrite their doctrines to follow certain teachings of Zoroaster, they could have promised to do so. They could originally have intended to change back once the Persians lost their influence and they had their temple back.
Moses as the father of the Christian and Israelite religion is absurd. The Idea the God of the Israelites gave Moses the correct history of the area is less fundamentally sound than the idea there is a Santa-Claus at the North Pole who comes around every Christmas with presents for all the good little boys and girls.
The soundness of the history in the Bible is reflected in the soundness of the origin of the Egyptians.
According to the Bible, the Egyptians were the descendants of Mizraim, a grandson of Noah. This would have meant the Egyptians Abraham encountered had come into being eight generations before the arrival of Abraham and should then have had their own history dating back eight generations when they would have had the same history as the Israelites.
Abraham came to Egypt shortly after 2000 B.C., the middle kingdom of Egypt. The Egyptian had twelve dynasties before Abraham. The achievements of the Egyptians in those twelve dynasties are such that they could not have been accomplished by a people so ignorant they had no clue as to their ancestry. Had they been descended from Mizraim, this would have been a part of their history. They would have had their lineage from Mizraim as the "divine" lineage and would have recorded it thus. They did not. This only proves they were not the lineage of Noah.
Abraham could not possibly have been in Egypt earlier than the pharaoh Sesostris. Since there are eight generations between Mizraim and Abraham and it would be reasonable to assume the average reign of Egyptian kings were for more than a generation, we could compare Mizraim with the time of the Pharaoh eight generations prior to Sesostris (1971-1926 B.C.E.) This would bring us to the tenth Egyptian dynasty, nearly five hundred years after the great pharaoh Khufu, more commonly known as Cheops, built the greatest of all Egyptian pyramids.
How can anyone suggest the Egyptians who could build such amazing structures knew absolutely nothing else? How can anyone possibly suggest that with their fixation on their King or Pharaoh as demonstrated by their King lists, that they did not know of such recent ancestors?
We have the lineage from Mizraim in the Bible to the time of Abraham, and this is less than three hundred years. This would then be about two hundred years after the building of the Cheops pyramid. The Egyptian race did not get their start at the time this structure was erected as thinking people are well aware of. At least twenty five pharaohs existed prior to Cheops. They date back much more than thousand years prior to Abraham. If the God of the Hebrews gave them the historical record, this alone is definite proof that the God is a liar for anyone who might have been uncertain.
A great many other examples of this impossibility could be illustrated. The possibility that the human lineage of the Israelites in lieu of recently discovered archeological written documents are correct is asinine. That the Israelites were the only descendants of Noah who got the story right is equally as absurd. Especially since the borrowing by the Israelites of material from other people can be demonstrated time and time again.
An interesting picture is the one of Noah floating around in the ark as the sole survivor of the great Flood while the Egyptians with hundreds of thousands of people are building such great structures as the Cheops pyramid. The Cheops pyramid would have been built just prior to the biblical flood, but the Flood could not have reached Egypt as there was no cessation in building activity and no disasters in Egypt. I would not have brought up these points if there was any value in the Biblical material or the cult of the Israelite Deity. The Christian religion we have is a liability which keeps Man linked to a third dimension where he does not belong. That is the reason this has to be straightened out.