8. Exodus and the 18th Dynasty
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 жов 2024
- Although there is on-going disagreement about the precise timing of the Exodus, the biblical chronology suggests it took place during the 18th Dynasty of Egypt. If that is correct, then it is conceivable that Hatshepsut was 'the daughter of pharoah' (later a pharaoh herself) who rescued Moses and reared him in the privileges of the royal household. His training as a prospective ruler of Egypt would certainly have been invaluable when it came to his actual career, the leader, lawgiver, judge, and military commander of the newly created nation of Israel. For more free resources, please visit www.brucegore.com.
Imagine being lucky enough to have this man as a teacher in middle school. What an amazing grasp of history he has.
Bruce, I'm sure you must have been told this a million times before, but you have an amazing ability to humanize historical figures and to make those old accounts feel as real today as I'm sure they were then. Talk about a calling...thank you for all of these videos. I've watched/listened to about 30 so far and still eager to listen to the next... 🙏😊
I am deeply grateful for such kind feedback. Thank you!
No 😅
@@GoreBruceYes, THANK YOU 🙏
I developed a love for the study of history in the tenth grade because of a great teacher like you. This changed my life as it created a desire to do well in school and I found it fun to memorize American History and later the History of Western Civilization in general, especially as it related to Biblical Studies. . You have made enough videos to keep me busy for the rest of my life. You are using your gift well, thank you.
Many thanks to you as well...and thanks for the encouragement!
Your lectures helped me understand the Bible. Thank you very much.
Dr. Gore your final comments here are so inspiring. Thank you for that wonderful perspective.
Agree very much.
I praise the Lord for teacher Bruce Gore. He is a true blessing.
Thank you for using the real timelines and knowing that amenhotep II was the pharaoh of exodus, i have had many arguments over this
Years ago I tried to figure out the pharaoh of the Exodus and came to the exact same conclusion -- and I wasn't even aware of the passage about Solomon's temple at that time. Interestingly enough, neither Amenhotep II or his heir Thutmose IV were first born sons, which further corresponds with the biblical account. The pharaoh with whom Moses dealt didn't die during the Passover (showing he wasn't a first born), but his firstborn son did. Likewise, Thutmose IV was not expected to be pharaoh because he was not the firstborn (see Dream Stele). Great stuff!
Amen!
@@GoreBruce but why not amenhotep III? Then Akhenaten reacting to the events of the exodus. He was not the first born. I believe Joseph was during Amenhemet III and Moses was during amenhotep III. Both had the moniker the great. God can build or devastate greatness. I think Joseph was Hor Awibre.
Good observation about passover first born son
This was a fantastic teaching. Great word and great information. Looking forward to the next lesson.
Thank you!
8th time watching this episode - 3rd time on the series. TY Mr. Gore
33:39 Lots of things in the Exodus narrative that are hard to imagine....I appreciate the free content. This is what UA-cam should be. Thank you. Liked, subbed.
Discovered your work, and just wanted to thank you so much. Really interesting and well presented. Thank you again
Thank you!
Couldn’t agree more Bruce!! Btw love the F major invention theme song
You're a great teacher Dr. Gore.
+Teresa Burton Thank you!
Exodus 12:40 mention 430 years, the same 430 years cited by Paul in Galatians as the time span from the covenant made with Abraham to the Covenant made with Moses (Galatians 3:17). On the face of it, therefore, the migration of the people of Israel under Joseph must have taken place at a considerably later time. The text in Exodus 12:40 has traditionally been understood in Jewish reckoning to include the years in Canaan as well as in Egypt. The LXX, for example, actually renders the text of Exodus 12:40 as "Now the sojourn of the children of Israel who lived in Egypt and Canaan was four hundred and thirty years." Nearly all Bible translations that I have
checked actually note that point in a footnote. The likely reason that Canaan was not mentioned in the original Hebrew text was because at the time, the negeb of Canaan, where Abraham resided, was under Egyptian authority, and was generally considered part of Egypt.
What a wonderful teaching!! Thank you so very much!! Looking forward to finding more of these!! 🙌🏻
Thank you!
Excellent lecture as usual but the sunday school lesson beginning 38:47 is so simple yet astounding and essential. Ive come back to listen to this portion and would like to highlight it for other viewers. The simple realization "Do NOT Fear" is a command rather than a suggestion has had a joyful impact. Better late than never :)
Be blessed
+Gebreyesus Gebresellasie Very encouraging! Thanks.
Gebreyesus Gebresellasie.
Studying Exodus under Daniel Master of Wheaton U. I found this exposition quite fulfilling. Thank you.
Just watched for the 2nd time. The Sunday school lesson at the end is right on, Pastor Bruce. Thanks again.
Excellent, honest, insightful teaching sir! Keep up the great job!
I love your work, God bless you and yours whenever your day on the beach comes my friend! Stand firm and do not fear brother for the Lord is salvation.
Thank you for the encouragement my friend!
***** thank you
At 28:26; I don't think we could or should compare, Moses to a modern day 80yr old. I love these lectures! 👍🏾💕
HI
Ron Wyatt did a wonderful job of rediscovering the route of the Exodus, taking as his starting point, the New Testament text written by Paul of Tarsus ' Mt. Sinai in Arabia' [ The Midian mentioned in this lecture ] Shalom to us only in Christ Yeshua.
Ron White is a proven fraud
I wish i had a sunday school teacher like this growing up
Agree, and wish i had history teachers from grade school to college that taught historical information and research.🙂🙂❤️
I love this Man . Hé is a humble Great Teacher,we are blessed to have such people.
You are very kind. Thank you!
@@GoreBruce Thanks You Mr. Gore for inlighting me.
Just ordered your book on Amazon. I can’t wait to read it!!! Enjoying ALL your lectures
Dear @Bruce Gore,
There appears to be a problem with your story about where the Israelites crossed the Sea -- It is not consistent with the Scriptures !
If the Israelites crossed the Gulf of Aqaba (as you identify as the Red Sea or Reed Sea), then that would mean that after they crossed it, they would then necessarily be in Saudi Arabia.
However, Scripture does not agree with this idea. According to Scriptures, after the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, they then entered the Wilderness of Shur. Ex. 15:22 says:
"So Moses brought Israel from the Red Sea; then they went out into
the Wilderness of Shur. ......"
We have a good general idea of where the Wilderness of Shur is located. It is in the northern half of the Sinai Peninsula, below the coastal region of the Mediterranean Sea. There is a very long historical provenance for this location. In addition to the witness of history, the Scriptures describe the location of the Wilderness of Shur as being between Egypt and the Negev. The Scriptures describe both Abraham and David as being active in that region.
Of course we don't usually think of Abraham and David as being active in the area of Saudi Arabia (because they were not and Scripture never states or implies they were).
This places the Wilderness of Shur on the Sinai Peninsula, so therefore, after the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, they then entered the Sinai Peninsula, according to the Scriptures.
Essentially, this eliminates the viability of the Gulf of Aqaba hypothesis. I do not consider the Gulf of Aqaba hypothesis as a possibility, let alone any likely explanation of the location of the Red Sea Crossing.
We must conclude that the Red Sea crossing point is somewhere along the present day Isthmus of Suez, or the northern part of the present day Gulf of Suez,
It would be difficult to determine where the site may be along the isthmus of Suez because time and the construction of the Suez Canal has radically altered the geography of the area. However, some of the deeper lakes are still there.
Though it has lost some of it's popularity, I personally think the northern portion of the Gulf of Suez is still a viable candidate for a crossing point.
Perhaps someday we will find more evidence to narrow down the list of possible candidates for the crossing point even more.
Be Well,
DZ
From Indonesia. Thank you very much.
You do give a fascinating light as to why Moses could even challenge Pharaoh in the first place. If Hatsheput really was the Pharaoh's daughter who found Moses, she likely would groomed him to marry her daughter and become her heir as the next Pharaoh. He didn't just have familial connections, this is a guy who was trained and groomed to represent the gods on the world stage. He didn't just have a passing knowledge of the rights and rituals of Pharaoh, Moses would have likely been there to assist Hatsheput's in rituals and the day-to-day affairs of running the kingdom as what would be expected of a crown prince. Fitting job skills for a guy who would later lead a nation.
So when Moses returns early in Amenhotep II reign, the young Pharaoh sees just a harmless old man. A step uncle who might have been Pharaoh if things weren't so different. He probably thought that Moses came back to ingratiate himself to the son of his enemy, likely in hopes of getting a cushy job in the royal court. If I was in Amenhotep's shoes, I would have used this as a possible propaganda piece telling the people, "Look! Even my father's most hated enemy acknowledge's my right to rule!" However, Moses doesn't want a job and instead makes a simple request.
Let My People Go.
Now, being a young Pharaoh, Amenhotep might have thought, sure I'll let his people go but I'm gonna toy with him first. I want to see him beg and plead for a couple of years before I relent. But then Moses turns his staff into a snake and Amenhotep would be "uh-oh! This isn't just some guy. This is another Pharaoh at my doorstep." So now it has become a spiritual conflict between 2 Pharaohs over whom the gods favor/which god is stronger. Amenhotep lost his chance to kill Moses outright. If he did so, it might have raised doubts over his divine rule and being a young Pharaoh, he needed to prove his divine power and authority to the people. So Amenhotep is forced to accept Moses' challenges head on and prove that he and his priests can beseech gods to perform the same plagues/miracles just as easily. Being a young Pharaoh, Amenhotep held out well passed it was confirmed that God was stronger then the gods of Egypt and favored Moses just out of pure stubbornness and pride.
This hypothesis really does explain a lot about the circumstances involved and the sociopolitical environment of the time. Moses's abilities and skills as a military and spiritual leader to his people. Why 40 years in exile. Why Moses was able to make such a request and not be killed outright by Pharaoh. And possibly why Pharaoh held for so long as he did.
Of course, as you admit as well Dr. Gore, this is hypothetical. Chronological dates aligning as they do is not solid evidence. At best, it is circumstantial evidence. But, like I said, it does explain a lot.
Either way, great show.
A very good summary of Gore's hypothesis. One of the very best theories I have ever heard. One that makes sense and meets the criteria. Of course...as you noted, it is circumstantial. Many an argument has been won through circumstantial evidence...and some have ended up being wrong. I am inclined to think this one fits better than any other...and is quite likely the correct one. All of it is absolutely fascinating.
Why no history of this in Egypt, not in archaeology , or drastic decline in Egypt economy, to support Moses and the people leaving Egypt? Certainly Egypt could not hide that.
@@Nkosi766 excellent and valid questions! The Problems lie in the fact that Bronze Age civilizations didn't record history so much as propaganda. Any failure, embarrassment, defeat (both political and military), or anything that would make their king and nation look bad was swept under the rug.
History as we know it wasn't conceived until Herodotus and people like actually bothered to write things down for future generations.
Egyptian civilization was roughly 3 to 5 thousand years old. What information we do have is but tatters, scraps of knowledge that was only recently discovered (200 hundred years give or take) or waiting to be discovered. The rest lost.
@@chadsmith8966 , despite the propaganda of writing history, the earth reveals the truth, Egypt tried their best to wipe out Hatshepsut rule, but the earth revealed her. We have one mention of a possible Israel by Merneptah around 12th century, and not a word of them for hundreds of years, until Omri, I don’t see how that’s possible for no one to mention such a powerful kingdom.
My other issue is, the Bible mentioned the names of a lot of insignificant rulers, like Og, and not one name of the pharaoh. My hypothesis is the Bible stories was written and a much later date, and the king list of Egypt was lost to them.
Josephus said the pharaohs didn’t use names, just the title pharaoh. We know that’s not true, and we know the era when the pharaoh stopped using names, therefore it’s mostly likely the Bible was written in that era. Clues in the Bible like, “that place is there to this day “ and referring to aren’t these things written in the annals of the kings, that tells me the Bible is a later than it’s timeframe. And Moses couldn’t possibly write the Bible is the second person form it is written, a humble man is not going to state how humble he is, nor can Moses wrote of his burial. That’s the only piece of the puzzle that doesn’t fit for me.
Moses could have saved us so much speculation if he had only written down the Pharaoh’s name.
Debbie Ward ...but where’s the fun in that??
The whole story is fake 😂
There was a prince of the 18th dynasty of Egypt called Wadjmoses. Interestingly there is a place named after Moses called Wadi Musa.
Great presentation. I'm familiar with victors rewriting history but to dismiss the Nubians as simply being warriors or servants for Egypt is an insult.
I certainly agree. If I left that impression, I apologize.
Natalie Jorden I agree their kushite kingdom survived Greek/Roman imperialism. Their Era lasted until the Arab/ Islamic invasions & later European colonialism. Some Aspects of those civilizations and cultures survive in parts of The Nile valley & West Africa but most importantly in Ethiopia
No record of any Exodus. Israel barely mentioned in Egyptian writing. Forty years wandering in the wilderness to go 150 miles.
@@gordonmcintosh2655 did you not watch the video at all...
Here for 2:40am sunday school course ❤
But nevertheless I enjoy his lectures. They do provide food for thought
Hallelujah for you Pastor B. thank you 🙏🏻 for teaching me.
) natars : نترس not fear
صبر در. مسیح:: wait for his deliverance
پایدار. در مسیح : payadar dar maseeeh
Above is Farsi translation of key words you have taught thank you my love for no gift is greater than this✝️in Christ hands we dwell❤️
Hallelujah hallelujah
I've been watching these videos but I almost had to stop at the thought of, Uncle Mose's School of Martial Arts. The sign would have a karate chopped Red Sea. "OK class today we're gonna work on how to pulverize a golden calf with stone tablets. Saul, I don't wanna hear about not feeling well. You gotta stick to that special diet I told you about. Everyone doing the aerobic workout? That's right lots and lots of walking except on Sabbath."
Don't forget that Sarah was Abraham's half sister.
Excellent analysis
You need to watch, "The Exodus Decoded", by James Cameron, presents a Simcha Jacobovici film.
It has some very interesting archeological evidenses pointing to the parting of the Red Sea!
Thanks for your lessons...
Jacobovici collects a lot of great stuff and has a lot of great insights in that film, I agree. As for his Sea of Reeds hypothesis, he rushes his idea with the volcano scenario, a Northern Midian point, and the Sinai Mt. Sinai alternative. It´s coherent enough, but I think Lennart Moller et al´s Exodus Revealed scenario identifies the Arabian-Midian Mt. Sinai option more convincingly. It´s fascinating that Jacobovici found ANOTHER candidate. Yet, the Moller et al scenario, and the coral formations with chariot wheel forms, along with the Nuweiba Beach context is a better fit. Did Jacobovici´s volcano affect the Gulf of Aqaba? Great efforts all around, for sure.
Here are some important practical questions. Moses wrote the first 5 books of the bible? Where did he get the paper and ink? Where did he find the time and space for writing them? What language did he write in? Moses in theory was raised as an Egyptian noble, so that implies he was trained in Egyptian script - what script was that? Hieroglyphics? some other script? If he wrote in Hebrew, where/how did he learn that skill? If he was trained as an Egyptian, he should have learned, and knew Egyptian script only, right? So how is it that those 5 books weren't written using Egyptian script (if they weren't written in Egyptian script)?
Find a scholarly discussion and many related matters in 'The Jewish Bible and the Christian Bible' (Julio Trebolle Barrera): www.amazon.com/Jewish-Bible-Christian-Introduction-History/dp/9004108882/ref=sr_1_4?crid=3QO20RVQ9CBUX&keywords=julio+trebolle+barrera&qid=1688907361&sprefix=%2Caps%2C2298&sr=8-4
Excellent work, thank you again.
Thank you! I appreciate that.
Thanks brother i appreciate what you do here for UA-cam. Its been great for me . Its been quite beneficial for me .... thanks again
tonyteb You are very welcome! and blessings to you and yours!
I wonder why he is so upset? he aint only upset he is angry. he keeps pointing his arms forward like the hitler
One of the coolest parts of the Exodus to me is that God strategically positioned his people in front of Baal Zephon. This was the equivalent to Mount Olympus for the Canaanites. God then opens the sea and swallows up the last Egyptian god in pharaoh, while leading his people towards Cannan and their gods.
I read Egyptologist Kara cooney’s book “the women who would be king” about Hatshepsut and I do not agree with your theory about Hatshepsut and Thutmose III. Your theory seems to be the opposite of hers.
Do not be afraid.
Stand firm.
See the deliverance of the Lord!
Bruce, is there anywhere where you provide sources to your historical information, i would love to be able to further seek this info out and be able to quote it. I just want you to know that i absolutely appreciate what you do and thankyou for your work and time in dedication to not only historical context but also to how it coincides with biblical context.
Please contact me at bruce@brucegore.com
The central claim is untenable.
What is referred to as the Holy Land was controlled as vassal states for almost all of the 18th Dynasty. It was no place to escape to.
Egyptian military garrisons were stationed there. The local rulers paid lots of tribute to the Pharaoh.
This history is not hard to find.
Scholars have debated on the events of exodus and the pharaoh reigning during that time (Meyers 2005). The exodus pharaoh was called Merneptah or Mernuptah .. (Igbo language: mere nuputa oha, meaning... 'accomplished the expulsion of the masses') was born in 1273 B.C., ruled from 1213-1203 B.C. at fourth ruler of the 19th Dynasty of the Ancient Egypt. He was the son of Rameses II ( Igbo language: Orie mee isi osa, meaning ' Almighty God made him head of the masses'). His title denote that he accomplished the exodus during his reign. I would suggest that the exodus occurred about 1210 B.C. This supports the narrative that the exodus took place in the (13th- 11th centuries B.C.)
Yes, but the late date is inconsistent with the biblical data at 1 Kings 6:1, a point also recognized by scholars who prefer the earlier time frame. Thanks for your interest!
More likely 1446 bce
@@ginaturney7068 The Exodus was accomplished by Pharaoh Merneptah (Igbo language: e fere oha Mere nuputa oha, meaning 'the pharaoh who accomplished the push out of the people'), reigned from July or August 1213 BC- May2, 1203 BC, as the fourth pharaoh of the Nineteenth Dynasty of Ancient Egypt.
Great presentationn. I recently heard it compellingly argued that the Exodus coincided with the final period of the bronze age, not long before the bronze age collapse, when different people groups, including the Israelites, and later the Philistines, migrated into or invaded the territory now known as Palestine. This would place the Exodus in the middle of the 13th century BC. What are the main arguments against this?
I had done my own research into The Exodus, and found the account of "IPUWER", an Egypt Sage to be most interesting. Ipuwer mentioned that "Volcanic Ash" was falling in Egypt as the Kebrew's were leaving Egypt? So, if you can find out which Egyptian Pharaoh was in power at the time that the Greek Island was erupting, you have the right person?
Yes, that's a popular theory with some. The case is made by Ian Wilson in his Exodus: The True Story (Harper and Row).
Excellent series, thank you.
canadiankewldude Thank you!
Hatshepsut was of course the only blood member remaining of the dynasty as it passed through her mother.
He keeps getting Sudan and Ethiopia confused for each other. The region Cush/Kush is only Sudan, NOT Ethiopia.
I don't believe "Jewish" is the correct term to describe the Hebrews in Goshen, yes some of them were of the tribe of Judah but "Jewish" is a modern term that describes people who practice Judaism. Its misleading because even they will admit most of them are not direct descendents to Judah Benjamin or Levy. Interesting breakdown nonetheless. I would love to hear your opinion on which Haplogroup is the lineage of the Israelites of the scriptures. Some say J others say E some say R, it's all very interesting.
Mount Sinai is in Arabia, according to Galatians chapter four, which is east of the Red Sea!
Indeed
In New Testament Times, the first century AD, the western border of Arabia, according to Greek geographers, was the Nile River. (the New Testament was written in Greek) This means Mt. Sinai can be in the Sinai Peninsula and not have to be in "modern" Arabia (Saudi Arabia). The Greek Septuaginta Bible (circa 275 BC) written in Alexandria, Egypt, states that Joseph met his father and brothers at Gesem of Arabia, a Greek rendering of Hebrew Goshen, in Egypt. This proves Arabia's western border was was the Egyptian Delta, Gesem/Goshen being associated with Egypt and Arabia. Genesis 45:10 "...you shall dwell in the land of Goshen..." The Greek Bible called Septuaginta (Genesis 45:10) "...and you shall settle in the land of Gesem of Arabia..."
Galatians 4:25 You refer to is an allegory. Sinai was part of Arabia in those days. Mt Sinai is in Sinai. There was no Saudi Arabia then.
Dr. Gore, have you seen the film "Patterns of Evidence: Exodus"? If so, what do you think about it? Also, what do you think of the "new chronology" developed by David Rohl?
I have not seen it, and offer no opinion on its content.
@@GoreBruce If you're ever in the mood to watch a documentary, I highly recommend it. Also, thank you for all of your videos! They have helped me learn a ton.
Dr Bruce, pls watch the film. They said they based the chronology on the archeology find of city of avaris. (city beneath the city of Rameses).
I would love to hear your comments in these....
I agree with your chronology but where do you get your information?
Chronology for ancient Egypt is commonly accepted (with minor variations) among Egyptologists). See for example Peter Clayton's excellent volume: Chronicles of the Pharaohswww.amazon.com/Chronicle-Pharaohs-Record-Dynasties-Ancient-ebook/dp/B00MFUC0R4/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=peter+clayton&qid=1561898370&s=gateway&sr=8-2The date for the Exodus, c. 1447, is based on the explicit biblical statement in 1 Kings 6:1, in which Solomon was said to have started building the temple 480 years after the Exodus. The most widely accepted date for Solomon's work is 967 b.c.
Some beach somewhere... theres thunderous sounds of the shaking grounds cause the pharoahs there
Could you give your opinion on the theory postulated originally by Sigmund Freud that Moses was originally one of the Thutmoses while he was residing in the royal house of Egypt, and changed his name to jut Moses after. I understand that the egyptian word "moses" means "son of" and after his fall from grace, as it were, he would no longer have been considered the son of Thut (Tut)
Freud was given to rather generous speculation as to the history of a lot of things, including the origins of his own Jewish people. Safe to say, he probably had better insight into psychology than history. I'm not aware of even a shred to sober historical evidence to support his theory.
@@GoreBruce Freud had no sober thoughts lol
Bruce, First of all thank you so much for your great work.
Mr. Bruce I actualy learned history that the pharaoh of the exodus was actually Ramses II? Therefore, are you saying exodus happened in 1400s B.C many years earlier of Ramses II?
Yes, the early date is based on the Biblical chronology established in 1 Kings 6:1. The later date has been accepted by more liberal scholars based on an anachronism related to the naming of certain Egyptian cities. Thank you very much for your kind feedback.
So: Exodus was actually just a legend which was based on Ahmose and the birth of the New Kingdom?
Ahmose did not only expell the Hyksos, but he also sieged and defeated them at Sile and Scharuhen, in Canaan.
After him, there were no walls of Jericho anymore and Canaan fell under egyptian influence for centuries.
Before him and Kamose, only the Hyksos had a Pharaoh (in Avaris) who used chariots in Egypt.
After all, only Ahmose had successfully challenged a historical Pharaoh who had chariots, before Canaan was conquered by Egypt and Jericho was destroyed. He successfully freed his own people and led them to a promised land, the reunited New Kingdom including Canaan. He brought new laws and a new religion about his one beloved God Amun, Amen. According to the egyptian records, Amen had spoken to Ahmose (Jah- Moses) and defeated the Hyksos.
None of you think that Egypt's enemies would have recorded such a defeat? If a bunch of slaves escaped Egypt and drowned the pharoas army you don't think any of Egypt's enemies would mention that?
Probably not. Before Herodotus, objective historiography was really non-existent. Annals were fundamentally recorded for purposes of propaganda. Thanks for your very thoughtful feedback.
Bruce Gore : That puts the Exodus in the same propaganda category
Of course! The Old Testament is admittedly highly selective in what it reports. Selectivity does not make a report false, either for Egypt or the Old Testament.
Bruce Gore : There is a difference between highly selective reporting and propaganda.
Not reporting what happened is “ highly selective reporting”
Reporting what did not happen and/ or embellishing what really happened and/or reversing the roles in what really happened qualifies as propaganda!
I fully agree. Thanks again.
Rev. Gore- Some have speculated that the Hebrews were Egyptian mercenaries. Do you have
any knowledge of or opinion on this speculation?
+Kenneth N. Shortlidge Thanks for the question. I've honestly never heard this theory proposed, and have no knowledge of the basis for such a hypothesis (but I'm always open to new insights!). Thanks.
+Bruce Gore Thanks for the reply. The basic question is why were the Hebrews willing to leave
Egypt if they were not slaves? Either way, an omnipotent God could have arranged things.
+Kenneth N. Shortlidge I'm assuming the last part was a joke.
This timeline is off by a couple hundred years probably. There is no way that a militarily potent and active Egypt would have tolerated Hebrews colonizing Canaan and attacking Egyptian vassal city states. It only makes sense if the Exodus occurred closer to the Bronze Age Collapse when Egypt couldn’t interfere.
In Tanakh “don’t fear” comes up nowhere close to 365.
However, the term “fear” (verb or noun) by itself appears awfully close to 365 times
23:17 The rendition of the Exodus documented in the Quaran would suggest that the Exodus event occurred during the reign of Thutmose. There is no tangible archeology in support of the assertion, but literary forensics may provide a clue. The conversation between Moses and Pharoh smacks of an intimate familiarity that could only have come from personal association. The maturity of the character may also be gleaned from another brief conversation between Pharoh and his military commanders. An arrogant young man would not be able to enjoy this tone of relationship comfort.
The column of smoke by day and fire by night should help place the exodus during the eruption of Thera Crete, the date which is well known?
Great lecture. Although I prefer the late date for the exodus. Just to give one reason, you mentioned that chariots were not introduced untill after the time of Joseph, yet we see him riding a chariot in the about in Genesis.
Anyway glad I found this channel though it looks like I have alot of interesting videos to watch!
Yes, I should have clarified at the time that chariots as weapons of war were not introduced until the 18th dynasty. Chariots as transportation for royalty were commonly used earlier. Thanks for the kind feedback.
@@GoreBruce the true date of the Exodus was just recently discovered. It was in 1446 BC. I would post the UA-cam link but it’ll just block my comment. So I’ll post the information in a different way.
Expedition Bible is the channel and the guys name is Joel Kramer. It was posted last month. Please check it out brother.
6:59 I thought there were chariots at the time of Joseph? Did he not ride his chariot out to greet his father Jacob?
The first mention of chariots in the Egyptian records is connected with the 18th Dynasty. These were chariots used as war machines. Earlier chariots were apparently not viewed as weapons of war, but merely means of transportation.
@@GoreBruce thank you Bruce, I love your lectures. I find myself revisiting these videos often.
The 'Hyksos' were Canaanites, as were the 'Israelites'.
The 'Israelites' were immigrants to Egypt during the Hyksos reign.
A careful reading of Genesis will show that Joseph 'enslaved'
the whole country during the latter years of the famine.
The 'Southern Egyptians' drove these 'Canaanite' rulers out of Egypt
after the famine was over, the 'people' were still enslaved!!!
The 'Canaanites' began to migrate out of Egypt under the new rulers.
There was no 'Exodus' as commonly presented,
there is absolutely no evidence of any such migration.
(A line of march consisting of two million people,
lined ten abreast, would stretch out 150 miles!!!)
The 'chronology' is also out of sequence,
by up to a thousand years.
Sonmout the manager of the Queen is Moses
Excellent!
Fear not. Stand firm. See the salvation of the LORD.
Using biblical events & working backwards to date other biblical events isnt archeology its circular reasoning.
How did I end up here?
Wait... you believe the Moses origin story despite Sargon's being identical and a thousand years prior? 🤔
There was nothing wrong with what Hatshepsut did she kept peace and prosperity and left the herim nephew with a independent Egypt
Agreed. Hatshepsut was a quite competent ruler.
Shaloom, mr Gore. I was reading Genesis 15 : 13, that say the Israelite will become slave in the foreign country for 400 years. It contradicted with the calculation of the timeline of Israelite spent on Egypt. According to your lecture, the Israelite became slave only for 120 years during the 18th dynasty. Do you have a logical explanation for this?
The 400 years referred to in Gen. 15:13 includes the time that Abraham and his descendants were in Canaan, which was then under Egyptian authority. This period corresponds generally to the 430 years referred to by Paul (Gal. 3:17), which spans the time from the covenant with Abraham to the Exodus. Approximately half that time, the people of God were in Canaan, and the other half they were in Egypt.
The downfall of Ankhnaten would have ment the expulsion of his followers.
Exactly... that's what I've thought for years and his high priest? Moses? with them...??
No they would not have.
I’ve got a hypothesis .moses got to the top of the Red Sea and there was no water there .he thought he was in the wrong spot .so he went south till he can see water .the Egyptians were on there heels .the Hebrews crossed the sea of reeds by the time they crossed and were on the other side the water started to come back in like a tide and the Egyptians chariots got caught in the water .it didn’t drown them on the chariots it drown some of them because the were trying get there bogged horses and chariots out of the mud .
Again, this is hypothetical, but if the exodus took place around 1447 and Moses was 80 years old, then Moses would have been born around 1527-ish. But Hatshepsut wasn't born until almost 20 years later, in 1507. It would have been hard for her to be the daughter who pulled Moses out of the river. Just a thought.
For commonly accepted dates for Hatshepsut, cf. Peter Clayton, Chronicles of the Pharaohs, p. 104ff.
@@GoreBruce Thank you for the response and direction. Although I couldn't find her birth date in the pages of the book referenced, your response did lead me to find the "high chronology " versus the "low chronology" dates. While some thoughts have her reign start around 1493, others believe it to start in 1512. In addition, her age would have been pretty young when she found Moses using the high chronology dating.
I appreciate your detailed responses on a video made years ago. It is impressive and also really makes me want to run a project by you concerning a movie or series I have been working on about Daniel and the gifts of the magi. I know better than to waste your time as I am just a dude out in the world, and you are a successful theologian. But I do appreciate your interaction with the comments on your channel. You definitely provide good insight on difficult subjects. I can't stop watching your videos.
13:06 What? Yes, we do! 13:48 This wasn't anything unusual. Mothers were often ruling as regent for their pharaoh-to-be sons. 19:25 She died at age 52, which isn't young for an ancient Egyptian. They believe she died of a cancer. 22:41 No, NOT first order of business!! If Thutmoses III hated Hatshepsut, and/or murdered her, he would not have waited twenty years later to destroy her imagery!! This "evil-stepmother" idea is proven outdated. Thut had twenty years to overthrow her, and could have at any time. Only the most obvious of her art is destroyed. Thut3rd did not order her temple or cult to be discontinued.
The Isrealites passed through Wadi Wadir and found themselves entrapped on Nuweiba beach on the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba. The remains of ALL of the Egyptian chariots including petrified bones both human and horse are still there on the underwater land bridge stretching acroos the gulf to the shore of Saudi Arabia TODAY!
How do you know this?
@@sapiensursus3034 it is available in youtube
> The remains of ALL of the Egyptian chariots including petrified bones both human and horse are still there on the underwater land bridge stretching acroos the gulf to the shore of Saudi Arabia TODAY!
No, they are not. This is all hoax stuff. Please don't listen to Ron Wyatt. He's quite the sham peddler. (Dittos for Bob Carnuke).
If there were any remains, an archeological dig would have collected all the materials and shuffled them off to the Cairo Museum, with all sorts of articles in all the archeological journals. And that hasn't happened.
Myths 😂
it was not kamose it was tau ii who's mummy was brutality damage so your wrong
Thanks for the feedback. For responsible scholarly treatment of the question, please see Dr. Peter Clayton, Chronicle of the Pharaohs (Thames & Hudson), p. 96.
www.amazon.com/Chronicle-Pharaohs-Reign-Reign-Chronicles/dp/0500286280/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=peter+clayton&qid=1608421044&sr=8-2
Okay, it is a hypothesis, but at 6:21, you say Ahmose is the first guy to use the chariot in Egypt. You also say at 6:55 he is the pharaoh that did not know Joseph. Genesis 46:29 says that Joseph went out in his chariot to welcome his dad.
So.....Joseph was the one that introduced the chariot. Or chariots were in use before Ahmose. Or the history is wrong. Or the bible is wrong.
Interesting stuff. I enjoy watching your lectures and will eventually get through them all. Thanks for making them available.
@studywithmefolks5809 Your senses are good.
Amenemhet II (reigned 1876-42 bce) and the Sea: Maritime Aspects of the Mit Rahina (Memphis) Inscription:
Expedition goods from Lebanon, list of raw materials and goods
six-spoked wheels 60
If the Egyptians are importing 6 spoked wheels they are probably putting them on chariots not donkey carts.
those that do minimize or deny the Exodus or anything else in the Bible I feel sorry for them but not really because I'm telling you now you cannot be a Christian if you do not believe every word of that book God left us his word for a reason to deny it is to deny him plain and simple
Great point! Which is why we should not deny God's laws. Which is why we must stone all women to death who aren't virgins. GOD IS LOVE!
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22%3A13-21&version=NIV
You have no evidence that the bible is god's word for one thing, and there is no archaeological evidence the events of Exodus having happened at the time it was described.
Bruce Gore is showing you that the Bible is nothing more than the mythical history of isreal but go off lol
A little to much insult on Hatshepsut ...
It's such a bummer all we thought we knew about the Hyksos turned out to be wrong. No invasion, no expulsion -- they weren't even an ethnic group. We, and Josephus, relied on an Egyptian "historian" that turned out to be just writing propaganda. Sometimes the truth bites.
So the Exodus is a story which was based on a great piece of propaganda. Just like all the fake reasons American Presidents have given to get us into every war during my lifetime -- unjust invasions, every single one. And we already knew that Egypt exaggerates all it's histories of how wars went -- on this they also lied to get Egyptians to invade Northern Egypt again, which started ruling itself when the Southern Kingdom started ignoring it due to internal issues.
Dr. Gore, I think you'll enjoy Dr. Petrovich's new book by CARTA 'World's oldest Alphabet' and certainly his soon to be published book 'Israel in Egypt'!
Thank you...I'll look forward to it.
@GoreBruce the true date of the Exodus was just recently discovered. It was in 1446 BC. I would post the UA-cam link but it’ll just block my comment. So I’ll post the information in a different way.
Expedition Bible is the channel and the guys name is Joel Kramer. It was posted last month.
10:01 Thutmose I had no sons by his royal wife (Queen Ahmose)? Then who was Amenmose (born before Thutmose I coronation), & Wadjmose (died before Thutmose I)?
Wadjimose was Moses drawn from the water. When he left, they counted him as dead to Egypt. He had a mark on his head. He was in line to be a pharaoh only because he outshined the one in line and he was adopted by the pharaohs daughter. I'm sure Moses was a threat to those of royal blood. My theory is Amenhotep I, father of Thutmose I was the pharaoh at the time Moses was drawn from the water, thus the name Wadjimose and he grew up with Thutmose I.
@@diannemarshall9318 I don't see how Wadjimose could be Moses (born c. 1525 BCE) when he was the son of Thutmose I (who reigned c. 1506 BCE to 1493 BCE).
you are dead on -the Sunday school lesson bro!
Bruce 'good looking guy' Gore strikes again! :)
So, Amenhotep the VI was not Moses? Or Ahkentaten was not Moses?
The fact the Ancient Egyptians didn't mention the exodus at all or the pass over makes me believe those incidents never existed
Did you miss what he said in beginning? That was a humiliating defeat, and scary retribution that none of their gods could protect them from. Of COURSE they'll cover it up, or not talk about it.
@@spencerfrankclayton4348exactly! Why would they report defeat. Propaganda was invited in the ancient world, not in today's media.
I think it's Tuthmosis the forth that was Pharoah of the Exodus.
My bet would be some of the early people whose story became the Israelite story were Egyptians. And the whole “exodus” story and going to Pharaoh to say “let my people go” yatta yatta was about the Egyptian dynasty taking back Lower Egypt from the Hyksos and then going on to conquer Canaan.
How could amenhotep ii be Pharoah of exodus when ramses came after amenhotep ii and ramses is mentioned in bible?
Ramses is not mentioned, but the city that was eventually named for him. That city existed earlier but was better known by its later name. The Biblical account was written later, and reflected the better known name of the city. The mention in the Bible is an intentional anachronism, not uncommon in historical writing. Thanks for your interest!
Much of this may have been cleared up if Moses has been inspired to name the Pharaoh. I guess it was God's sovereign will to keep us guessing? I feel this will never be solved...
The only problem with this is Amenhotep was Solomon and his dad the great conquerer King David. No other evidence exists for David and Solomon other than this appropriation by latter Rebbi’s...
This is according to "conventional" egyptologist time reckoning which totally ignores the biblical account, egypt was laid bear during the hyskos ki gdom. I believe after the exodus, and plauges, egypt was so ruined that it became the "go too" scrap yard of its neighbors. Thats what was described as the inferior Hyskos kingdom.
I would really like to ask you why do you think that Amenhotep II as the pharaoh of the exodus?
The thing is, if the crossing of the Red Sea took place at around 1450s and Tuthmoses III died in 1450, would it make more sense that Tuthmoses was the pharaoh of the exodus? Thanks.
+Fox Moulder Many take that view, and I am not hostile to it. 1 Kings 6:1 states, however, that the building to the temple began 480 years after the Exodus. There is widespread acceptance of 967 as the date that Solomon began to build the temple. Four hundred eighty years earlier would be 1447. It is also commonly accepted that Amenhotep was ruling after the death of his father Thutmose III in 1450. I won't die on that hill, but that is my reasoning.
*****
Tuthmoses III is the pharaoh of the Exodus.
What this pastor is saying does not seem to make sense.
Thutmose III had ruled for the bulk of the time that Moses was in Midian (40 years). When Thutmose died (Exo. 4:19), Moses was commanded to return and confront the son of Thutmose III, Amenhotep, who appears to be the young and arrogant Pharaoh of the Exodus.
The temple began to be built in the year 966BC. If we add the 480 years after the exodus, that give us the year around 1446 BC.
Thutmose III is reported to have died in the year 1450. It looks obvious to me that the pharaoh of the exodus was Thutmose III.
Now, if we take Amenhotep, who died reportedly in 1419, then the year of the building of the temple must be wrong.
*****
Lets not confuse things. The Bible specifically says that the pharaoh died in the waters. There is nothing to interpret here about his death.
As far as I am concern, the historical records seem to confirm what the Scriptures says.
The bible teaches that the Israelites were strangers in a foreign country for 400 years. So I'm yet to see how what he is saying lines up correctly. Acts 7:6
Stephen bases his statement on Genesis 15:13, which makes reference to the 400 years. Paul (Gal. 3:17) measures a total of four hundred years from the promise to Abraham until the giving of the law at Sinai. The reason the 'oppression' includes the time in Canaan is likely because at that time Egypt exercised control over Canaan.
@@GoreBruce I see, yes 430 years that I have in the Galatians 3:17 passage. While the Genesis passage features the aspect of the Israelites being foreigners in an foreign land, not their own for 400 years. The acts passage is most likely a reference to this Genesis passage. So what you are proposing is that because Egypt occupied that land of Canaan, in this sense Israel and his family were in a foreign land. This giving the extra "missing years" of the dating? If this is the case, it makes a strong case for why the Egyptians were not contested when making a "great company" into the land of Canaan, simply because they had already control over the land with their 17th Dynasty during Israel's life. This may give us the missing years required to make the biblical account. Is this what you are proposing?
@@GoreBruce We see this "great company" of Egyptians entering the land of Canaan in Genesis 50:9 and there is no mention of war or retaliation by the inhabitants, yet is was a 'great company', however later on, probably when Egypt no longer had control over the canaanites, Israel have to almost send a spy team to explore the land (Numbers 13).