Orthodox Absurdity
The error in associating the Exodus with Egypt’s New Kingdom (Dynasties 18 - 22), caused both biblical and profane scholars to arrive at absurd conclusions. A typical example of this thinking is published in The New World Dictionary Concordance to the New American Bible. Concerning the activities of the Exodus, it apologizes for the exaggerated Biblical language, and says:
It is the common opinion of scholars today that the events narrated in Exodus 1-15 should be dated during the reign of Ramses II (1301-1234 B.C.). The Israelites had been obliged to forced labor in the building projects of Ramses II (Exodus 1). The Exodus then was the attempt, which succeeded, to escape from this situation. The Bible obviously dresses the event in epic colors which greatly exaggerated the historical facts. In the miracle of the Sea of Reeds only a section of chariots belonging to one of the pontine garrisons, and not the whole army of the Pharaoh, was involved. [New World Dictionary Concordance, Egypt, P. 148]
Because of this scholarly attitude, serious misunderstandings are made concerning the validity of numerous Biblical topics. First, scholars assume that the Hebrews borrowed from the Babylonians such concepts as the flood, demons, creation and vast numbers of others. Second, because the validity of biblical reports has been undermined, doubt has also been cast on the order of the Old Testament books as well as their writers.
With our reconstruction of the Hebrew Exodus according to Egypt’s records, suddenly validity is restored, not only to the Bible, but also to several other ancient Hebrew books which contradict the traditionalist viewpoint.
Post Exodus Egypt
What are the ramifications of cutting a millennium from Egypt’s mysterious past? If our new historical model is to be seriously accepted, we need to investigate it’s feasibility and logistics;  we need to discover what adjustments might be required in the post Exodus period.
After the Exodus, the cities of Upper (southern) Egypt suddenly found themselves as independent states, and while leading families resumed rule of their cities, Egypt now had several co-existing Dynasties. These independent kings were quick to make treaties and the land again became unified, but not under one king. This unity was created by mutual military weakness and a need for inter-nome commerce. It was only natural that many of these kings would take credit for uniting “the two lands”, having steles (stelas) made to tell their own people how they united Egypt. This is exactly what we find in the Egyptian records.
After the Exodus, Egypt’s co-existing, simultaneous Dynasties were 7 through 12. All these Dynasties followed Dynasty 6. Is there any evidence to this effect? Could Dynasty 12 (Middle Kingdom) have emerged out of the grand turmoil of the plagues?
The second King of Dynasty 12 was Sesostris I. He reigned during a time of famine as indicated on the tomb of Ameni who was a contemporary of Sesostris. It says:
...No child of the poor did I afflict; no widow did I oppress, no landowner did I displace; no herdsmen I drive away; from no small farmer did I take away his men for my own work. No one was unhappy in my days, not even in the years of famine. [Brugsch, EUP, Vol. I, P. 305]
Ameni’s reference to the previous years of famine could indeed refer to the famine era caused by the Exodus plagues. If the Exodus plagues were caused by astral irregularities as Velikovsky asserts then agriculture might not have normalized for a decade.
First Intermediate Period
At the demise of Dynasties 5 and 6, the land of Egypt became immersed in a dark age which scholars call the First Intermediate Period.
Along the Nile several cities began to dominate, especially Thebes. Within a decade the ruling family at Thebes had created a Dynasty and soon made claims on all Egypt. Like it had always been, the weaker kings were subjected, but because they were considered descendants of the gods, they were seldom killed. Sometimes these subjugated kings were allowed to rule in their own district and pay a yearly tribute to the dominant Dynasty. The dominant Thebian Dynasty (12) allowed other kings to rule at Herakleopolas (Dynasties 9 and 10), Memphis (Dynasty 8), Abydos (Dynasty 11), and possibly at Tanis (Dynasty 7. But, Reader beware! Traditional historians assign Dynasty 11 or 12 as the beginning of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom).
The Middle Kingdom
According to traditional dating, a dark-age began at Dynasty 7 and lasted to Dynasty 11. Then Dynasty 12 composed the Middle Kingdom. In our revised model, Dynasty 12 co-existed with the others but later dominated. Therefore, I propose almost exactly two hundred years elapsed from the Exodus to the end of Dynasty 12’s Middle Kingdom.
Historically there is no evidence of a weakening of the kings at the end of Dynasty 12, but investigators notice that this Thebien rule was suddenly and drastically halted. Why?
The end of the Middle Kingdom (Dynasty XII) was marked by volcanic eruptions. [Immanuel Velikovsky, Earth in Upheaval, PP. 194-197]
If more than one volcanic eruption occurred, perhaps it shows evidence of another astral disturbance, in other words an astral cycle.
Some catastrophist historians have proposed that both the Old and Middle Kingdoms ended with vast geological upheavals. They attribute both disasters to an astral collision with the Earth. Because Dynasty 12 lasted 200 years, they propose a 200 year cycle of astrally caused catastrophes. Though this is somewhat out of the scope of this study, I tend to agree with this theory. It was this sort of upheaval which terminated both the Middle Bronze Age and Egypt’s Middle Kingdom.
According to our model, the termination of Middle Bronze in Israel would coincide with the era of the Judges. This was when the Song of Deborah was composed, where “From the heavens the stars fought from their courses” (fought from their paths) [Judges 5:20].
If this verse is taken seriously and literally, it tells of some unusual movement among the stars. A battle among the stars would not drastically affect the Earth, but if those stars were planets, then look out. Because paths are associated with planets, not with stars, I believe this text needs serious attention. If the paths of the planets were affected, it would indeed affect us.
The Second Intermediate Period
Whatever caused the end of Middle Bronze age was powerful enough to send Egypt into another dark-age. Again nations were destroyed and tribes displaced. This is when the semi-nomadic Hyksos slowly invaded Egypt’s eastern delta [See Chapter 4 for more on the Hyksos].
This left an independent Dynasty (14) in the south, while the 15th Dynasty Hyksos made the native 13th and 14th Dynasties into Vassal Kingdoms. The powerful Hyksos King Kyan of Dynasty 15 made himself ruler over all Egypt and Arabia for about 13 years. After Kyan’s death, Dedhotpere Dudumose asserted his rule south of Thebes and thus began the 17th Dynasty.
The 16th Dynasty was also one of Hyksos Kings ruling in the eastern Delta and at Memphis. By the time Dynasty 17 emerged, Egypt’s second dark-age was ending.
Egypt’s New Kingdom
As the 17th Dynasty gained power, the Hyksos gradually lost territory. Contemporary with the Hyksos Kings were six Sea-Kings in the North Delta.
The beginning of the 18th Dynasty heralded a new historical age which came to be known as the “New Kingdom”. This was the era of Imperial Egypt, an age embellished with great temples.
Archaeologists came to name this time as the “Late Bronze” period.
It is also the age where traditional chronologists placed the Israelites under Egyptian bondage. This New Kingdom encompassed Dynasties 18 through 20, though the most noted, most powerful Dynasty was the 18th.
Hazards In Dating
The third King of the 18th Dynasty is a prime example of deliberate falsification of the ancient king lists. Conventionalists have come to accept the reign of King Thutmose I as 35 years; yet X-rays of his body reveal that he only lived to the age of about 18. In fact, most of the Kings of the New Kingdom (Late Bronze) died at an early age. This has caused many historians to readjust the total length of numerous Dynasties.
Agreeing with the revisionists, I place the 18th Dynasty co-existing with King David and Solomon of Israel. This synchronism, first introduced by the late Immanuel Velikovsky, is today a raging battle in academia, for suddenly, the relationship of many biblical and Egyptian personalities are interrelated. For example, the great Queen Hatshepsut (Dynasty 18), who voyaged to the land of Put, was more than likely the famous Queen of Sheba who visited Solomon. [Velikovsky, Ages in Chaos, (Abacus 1952), PP. 99-130]
New Associations
The most powerful of all Pharaohs, Thutmose III (Dynasty 18), who sent his army all the way to Mesopotamia, was, according to Velikovsky, the Bible’s King Shishak, who sacked Solomon’s Temple after Solomon died in the days of Rehoboam and Jeroboam (971 B.C.). [Velikovsky, Ages in Chaos, (Abacus 1952), PP. 194-196]. Today several researchers agree with this position, especially after seeing Carbon-14 test results. A set of tests, performed on charcoal from a burial level of Thutmose III’s grave, revealed a date of 1205-1087, instead of the traditional 1500-1370 B.C. [University of Pennsylvania, Radiocarbon, Vol. 7, 1965].
The famous heretic Pharaoh Akhnaten (Dynasty 18) would now be historically placed with King Jehoshaphat of Jerusalem (896 B.C.). Still another contemporary of Akhnaten was Shalmaneser III of Assyria.
Radiocarbon Revelations
The traditional date for Akhnaten (Amenhotep IV) is 1375-1358 B.C.; yet C-14 tests made from seeds, reed, papyrus, and other short-lived plants found in Tutankhamen’s tomb, dated 899 B.C. [C-14 tests by Radiocarbon laboratory of the British Museum, London, 1971]. The actual number of years separating these two Kings of the 18th Dynasty is about 25. Thus, it appears that Immanuel Velikovsky has been vindicated, for this was his predicted date for the era of these two kings.
C-14 tests have also indicated that Velikovsky was again correct in making Ramses II, third King of the 19th Dynasty (traditionally dated at 1290-1224 B.C.) the same as the Pharaoh Necho II, associated with Dynasty 26, who invaded Israel and was defeated by Nebuchadnezzar in 605 B.C..
Traditional history tells us that Ramses III (1198-1166), repulsed an invasion of Sea People whom they have identified as the Philistines. But now we know the invaders were not Philistines; rather, they were Greek mercenaries employed by the Persians during the Persian Empire. Evidence for this is provided by the Greek letters found on glazed tiles from the palace of Ramses III. In other words, historians have unwittingly placed Ramses III 800 years ahead of the invention of this Greek alphabet.
The era of the 20th Dynasty became even more suspect when it was found that just a mile from his palace was a cemetery containing scarabs of Ramses III. But with these scarabs were also found paintings and hieroglyphics dated in the 4th century B.C..
Thanks to faulty dating by traditional Egyptologists, we have been taught that a long dark age existed in Egypt from 1,300 B.C. to 600 B.C.. It isn’t so.
Monumental Revision Needed
Archaeologists object to Velikovsky’s history adjustment because they place Palestine in the early Iron age during this period (King Saul era) while Egypt’s Dynasty 18 was still in the late Bronze age.  But this is to be expected. They do admit that Egypt was not as innovative as Babylonia and Assyria, but cannot explain why Palestine had Iron before the Egyptians or Israelites. The Bible, however, does explain it [1 Samuel 13:19]. The coast of Palestine was the land of the Philistines who had a monopoly on iron working.
The Philistines kept iron-smelting and forging methods secret so their weapons would remain superior to those of their neighbors. [Great People of the Bible and How they Lived, Readers Digest, P. 116]
According to the traditional reckoning, this technology was kept from the Egyptians by the Hittites; but Velikovsky also advances the era of the Hittite Empire from the accepted 13th Century B.C. to the time of the Neo-Babylonian Empire (605 B.C.- 539 B.C.).
In 1905, when excavations of the Boghazkio ruins began, art experts dated the orthostatic (upright) stones to the 7th and 6th centuries B.C.. But other scholars were equally sure that the ruins were those of the Hatti, enemies of Ramses II (13th century B.C.). With Velikovsky’s reconstruction of the period, the Hittite Empire is restored to the 7th and 6th centuries, exactly as the ancient artifacts demanded.
Egypt Conclusion
The synchronisms we have proposed drastically affect the historic record of either the Israelites, or the Egyptians; they reveal how traditionalists have misplaced some sections of the past by almost a thousand years. Either Egypt’s history is a thousand years too old or Israel’s history is a thousand years too young.
In order to arrive at the truth, we need to determine which country’s history possesses the most accurate method of chronological dating, the Hebrews or the Egyptians?
Egypt had no chronology, and what records they did keep, were mostly destroyed or changed by the jealousy of some later king. In addition to this, the fact that the Egyptians were extremely proud of their antiquity, led to their tendency to exaggerate their antiquity.
On the other hand, the Hebrews, through their library of books (today known as the Old Testament Bible), supplied history with a chronological genealogy in a long, unbroken catalog. It is the Hebrews who provided lists of the founding fathers of all nations, not just their own. It is the Hebrews who detail accounts of how the nations were founded, as well as how they got along with each other. Rather than being “Johnny-come-latelys”, as some suggest, the Hebrews’ own genealogy even provides detailed history of those other nations whom they served. In all the world, only the Hebrews furnished civilization with a reliable and testworthy table of nations.
Contrasted with the ragged Egyptian chronology there is no comparison. Records still exist where we see Egyptians bragging about their ancient history. One cannot help but believe that these tall tales of Egypt’s remote past were exaggerated generation after generation, just as their king lists prove.
Knowing these facts, early historians of the Christian era were obligated to fabricate their own history of Egypt. In so doing, they did use the Hebrew records as a guide, but they made one major, and very serious, mistake: they associated the name Ramses [in the Bible at Exodus 12:37] with the 19th Ramazoid Dynasty. They failed to understand that the family name of “Ra” had existed long before the New Kingdom. [Noah’s grandson’s name was “Miz-Ra-im” and his nephew was “Ra-a-ma”. See Gen.10:7.]
The origin of the name “Ramses” is supplied in the dependable “log of nations” given in Genesis 10, where it lists the sons of Ham (Noah’s son). These men became known outside Israel as the early family of gods. Ham’s son was Cush, father of Nimrod, and of Ra-a-mah. It is this Ra-a-mah who founded the land or district of Ramses, also called Goshen [compare Gen. 47:4 with Gen. 47:11]. Later, the city of Ramses was built by the enslaved Israelites during the 6th Dynasty.
The Ramezoid line of Egyptian Kings, who claimed to be direct descendants of these god men, came to power much later in history (Dynasty 19). There is no doubt; Israelites were not enslaved during the era of King Ramses, as has been taught for so long.
Obviously, the enslaved Israelites (during Dynasty 6) predated the era of King Ramses III (Dynasty 19) by a thousand years. (This thousand years is based upon the traditional model of history, but actually does not exist.)
Summation
We have shown how the records prove that Abraham was in Egypt at the beginning of the 2nd Dynasty. Joseph was there during the 3rd and 4th Dynasties, and later, as we have seen, the accounts of the 6th Dynasty Kings match the chronicles of Moses in Egypt. With these discoveries, I submit that the age of the world’s oldest civilizations should be drastically reduced.
Now we shall address our original question: whose history should give, Egypt’s or the Hebrew’s? As the evidence proves, it is Egypt’s history which must move. The old Hebrew Book seems to be more than holding its own.
Consequences Of The New Model
When philosophers want to get profound and achieve a “bottom line” to human existence, their ultimate question is: “What is the meaning of life?” Well, what should intelligent life accomplish in this universe? Essentially this is asking, What are your values? and Where are you going? In the animal kingdom the answer is simply, survive, enjoy the moment, and reproduce. This attitude has permeated the western world since Charles Darwin.
Today’s politically correct name for this mind-set is a “secularist society”. A wise sage once said, “By their fruit you shall know them.” Now, after a century of this secularist attitude, we have the secularist fruit. We see it literally everywhere: rampant crime, youth with no direction in life accept to space out on drugs or become sports heros, adults whose only desires are to become sexy, or accumulate wealth for status and leisure’s sake, or become powerful and dominant.
Darwin told us we were animals and in this vein a new religion was born. This new religion, secular humanism, tells us that the Ancient Book of Ethics and Rules is obsolete. It is bizarre how that ancient standard of conduct helped humanity survive for thousands of years, but now, in only one century the “new society” is on the verge of destroying humankind.
Perhaps Darwin was wrong; perhaps there exists more to humanity than animalism; perhaps art, heritage, gentleness, grace, worship, and affection should be added to human enterprise.
Unfortunately, secularists have tried to nullify the ancient old document which handed us culture, love, science, and the rules of human engagement. They have became so bold as to tell us that the ancient document was a lie, an agenda to religiously enslave an ancient people.
We clearly see an agenda, but it is not designed to unite an ancient people. The agenda is a modern attempt to eliminate biblical culture in the twentieth and twenty first century of humankind.
Fortunately, with our new model (which is actually the ancient one), the genuine seeker of truth can finally stand toe to toe with secularists and defeat them in their own arena.
 
 

ptahotep, shepherd kings, goshen, jubilees, balm, velikovsky, moses, sage, plagues, enbalming, 110 years, circumcise, jasher, oswiris, ptahotep, shepherd kings, goshen, jubilees, balm, velikovsky, moses, sage, plagues, enbalming, 110 years, circumcise, jasher, oswiris, ptahotep, shepherd kings, goshen, jubilees, balm, velikovsky, moses, sage, plagues, enbalming, 110 years, circumcise, jasher, oswiris, ptahotep, shepherd kings, goshen, jubilees, balm, velikovsky, moses, sage, plagues, enbalming, 110 years, circumcise, jasher, oswiris, ptahotep, shepherd kings, goshen, jubilees, balm, velikovsky, moses, sage, plagues, enbalming, 110 years, circumcise, jasher, oswiris, ptahotep, shepherd kings, goshen, jubilees, balm, velikovsky, moses, sage, plagues, enbalming, 110 years, circumcise, jasher, oswiris, ptahotep, shepherd kings, goshen, jubilees, balm, velikovsky, moses, sage, plagues, enbalming, 110 years, circumcise, jasher, oswiris,