Genesis 39:1,( I have already established that the Egypt of these times
was in the area of Ur. When we look at the story of Joseph from now on
we will be linking it up with this area.)And Joseph was brought down to
Egypt.
If the area that his family were living in was around the area of the
middle east now known as Syria, that makes more sense. Since they were
not far from Haran, where they originally came from and went to for wives.
If then, when Joseph was sold to traders they would have been heading
for Ur(Egypt). And it makes more sense that the Ishmeelites were in that
area above Arabia. Which at that time was a lush, growing area. If you
look at a map of that area you are really going sideways to Egypt not
down. Remember, they would have taken directions from the movement of the
sun, which traveled from east to west. And to go down meant to go South
not west to Palastine.
When Joseph is awarded the control over all of Egypt(Ur) he is given
the name; Zaphnath-paaneah. The efforts of the Archaeologists to attach
the name of Joseph to a statue they found, should have that name on it. Or
he should be known by that name. I wish I knew if that name has any
connection to the known Egyptian names of that period. If so it
should have some resemblance to their names. I don't believe it does.
Genesis 47; I find it hard to imagine a famine in the Egypt of the Nile
valley. As long as the river flows there is water for man and beast and
field. There is no mention here of the Nile river drying up! Which is
what would have to happen for the land of Egypt to experience a famine
of such magnitude.
47:21 And he removed the people from one end of Egypt to the other and
brought them into the cities.
A deserted land open to Africa? One end to the other implies a wide land.
Not a long land. And all up and down the Nile, close by all the farms, were
cities that the people were close to. That is the shape and reality of
Egypt. Instead it reads like he is dealing with a wide and spread out
land where cities were not many away from the river valley of the
Euphrates. Anyone altering these words would not look too closely at
something that does not give a name or obvious description. Or they might
not see the implications of the words.
Nowhere in any Egyptian text have I ever seen or read of the people of
Egypt not owning their own lands. This would not be something that would
go unrecorded in my estimation by the Egyptians. For the loss of land and
becoming a slave over the entire length and breadth of Egypt would be a
thing to never forget. But for this to have taken place in Ur is quite
possible as there was no records remaining when Ur was destroyed nor where
there any people left to record things after the time of Moses. Since that
is not an area that they are looking at for proof of Joseph or Moses, much
may have been overlooked or just not dug up yet. Or it could still be
sitting in the British Museum among the thousands of clay tablets still
undeciphered yet.
I might just mention here that the land of Goshen has never ever been
definitely found either in Egypt or elsewhere.
48:7 The name �Bethlehem� is mentioned here far ahead of it�s time and
if I understand it the Archaeologists suggest the ancient name of the
city was Bethel and changed to Bethlehem after the time of Moses.
