>end of the line pharoah>let my people go, or ill kill every firstborn child and animal in all of egypt, because that is the only way to end slavery.Lol.
>>18692142The left gun hardens hearts and the right gun gives kids brain cancer.
Crazy how the Egyptians, who were such meticulous record keepers you can still find tax records and reports of ancient grain harvests never mentioned ANY of the shit in exodus. No frogs from the sky, not first born deaths, no bloody Nile.Really makes you think.
>>18692149Uhhh God destroyed all records of His interactions with goyim and then He planted dinosaur bones in the ground and created 4 other major world religions to deceive you lol.
>>18692142> because that is the only way to end slavery.What?
>>18692170right? there are posts overtly priding themselves in not understanding the basics of the biblical narrative, but OP seems to have done it on accident
>>18692142That's zeus or..?
>end slaveryNot what happened. The escaped judeo-mosheites kept that practice for over a millennium, and then chrikes kept that for another millennium and a half.
>>18692158>Dinosaur bonesHe also planted Arab bones in the Levant to trick people into disbelieving zionism, that crazy son of a bitch. What's with his fixation on burying deceitful bones?
>>18692142>YOU... YOU ATE AN APPLE?>THAT DOES IT. NO MORE MR NICE GOD.
God did NOT in fact end slavery btw
>>18692222no chuddy, eating an apple is fine. they ate a FRUIT. A FRUIT god placed in the center knowing they will eat it, get it right sweaty.
>>18692149Apologetics often cope with this and say “hurr durr Egypt didn’t record their losses”. But we don’t just rely on propaganda steles as Ancient Egypt left behind vast quantities of everyday administrative records, legal papyri, letters, and domestic receipts. Exodus describes the sudden death of all firstborn sons, the total collapse of the agrarian workforce, the loss of an entire chariot army, and the devastation of the economy via the Ten Plagues. If the Exodus did happen, the catastrophic fallout would inevitably ripple into day-to-day administrative paperwork, grain supplies, and military rosters. No such disruptions exist in the records around the time period the Exodus supposedly took place. If the Exodus did happen, Egypt would have completely collapsed without fully recovering, but no such collapse happened because the Exodus didn’t happen.Plus we don’t just have a lack of evidence for the Exodus, we have contradictory evidence as according to traditional biblical chronology, the Exodus happened during the later half of the New Kingdom period and archaeology shows this exact era was the absolute peak of Egyptian imperial power, economic power, and aggressive military expansion. The country shows no signs of a society recovering from total infrastructural collapse. If the Exodus really happened, it should leave behind a lot of physical evidence beyond records, but no such thing exists. The traditional dating of the Exodus is 1446 BC, but Egypt shows no sign of decline or collapse during this time and they even continued to militarily occupy the Levant for a few more centuries.
>>18692273>it's over bros>Nile turning red isn't in the legal papyri
>>18692273Egyptians also spun certain losses into victories. They would have attributed the Nile turning red or frogs raining from the sky to their own gods.>>18692288Owning thousands of Hebrew slaves isn’t in their documentation either. Curious.
>>18692273There's also no record of there ever being a significant population of semitic slaves in Egypt. Exodus is very likely a mythologized memory of Egypt's bronze age conquest of Canaan, during which time the ancestors of the Israelites would've lived under Egyptian hegemony. Though it's extremely unlikely they were all enslaved.
>>18692149The ancient Egyptians are kind of infamous for 'editing' their own history whenever convenient. That hey got ultra-gigamogged by God and they completely erased it from their records is not out of character.I think the story has more holes than that.
>>18692423>the fact that there isn't a single shred of evidence recorded by this civilization that recorded almost everything is proof it happened
>>18692288Neither is the loss of their livestock and army and the economic devastation that the plagues would realistically cause
>>18692142>>18692149>>18692273>>18692288>>18692423I find it hard to believe that you didn't understand the true events of exodus, even without looking at metaphors. Especially for a site that constantly refers to Jews getting expelled.Let me paint you a picture:A minority lives in your wealthy country. They cause so much troubles (or plagues, if you will) that you are forced to banish them by Royal Edict, because literally everybody is complaining about them.Said-minority then decides to write a book/narrative in which "You didn't expel us! We freed ourselves! We left all of our possessions behind, and left of our own accord!...We won so hard, we didn't even have time to let our bread rise....Not exiled or banished into sure-death.... We totally won and then became stateless nomads straight into the nearest desert!" (...As winning humans usually do, y'know...).If it had happened in Spain in 1492, we would have just called it "The Edict of Expulsion", but because the exact same thing happened in 1000BC it's suddenly called "Exodus" aka "We left willingly, without money, with flatbread, straight into the desert...".
>>18692179You think arabs are indigenous to the Levant..?
>>18692435The sad part is that what you just said would be blasphemy to most Christians because they view it as actual history, and also, the sadder part is that the Jewish slavery in Egypt never even happemed at all, so you also misunderstand the book too, it was an entirely made up story of slavery that never happened in any sense historically, coupled with a literal belief that an all powerful sky man saved them by killing their firstborns and splitting the sea and their hero is a shepherd who killed a guy lol.
>>18692423Its not like jews don't forge historical events either to make themselves look better. The entire Bible, from a secular view, is mostly a big compilation of hebrew propaganda.
>>18692435No evidence of Hebrews ever living in Egypt, neither as slaves nor as a "wealthy minority"
>>18692435Except there were never any Jews living in Egypt in any great number. There were no slaves of this kind in Egypt at all. Surely the war of conquest that made so many slaves for the Pharaoh would have been the subject of several propaganda pieces, or at least mentioned in mundane record keeping because moving and feeding that many people across a desert would be a laborious logistical affair. The Egyptians kept meticulous records of their livestock, their granaries, and their population. But somehow multitudes of Hebrews go completely unmentioned, throughout the time period they supposedly were enslaved in Egypt.
>>18692435Bruh we have had the Rosetta stone for a long time now. Hieroglyphs are readable. You can't handwave Exodus away as "well we don't know what REALLY happened!" because we do know, now, because we can read the records Egyptians kept. The only reason your shitty Jew fable has been kicking around as "history" for all this time is because we lost the reading of Egyptian hieroglyphs. Gaining access to all that written record has exposed it for the lie it is.
>>18692435That’s a really dumb interpretation of events because there’s no Egyptian records of Hebrew slaves, and they took meticulous records on all their slaves and laborers.
>>18692462The entire Hebrew bible is basically a bunch of post-hoc stories that either retcon out Judaism's polytheistic origins, or self-punishings explanation for the Babylonian exile(like the entire book of Judges). It would not be beyond them at all to invent a story about slavery and escape from Egypt because of their real experiences with Egyptian conquerors in the Levant.
>>18692435> We left all of our possessions behindThis is not what happens in exodus. None of you niggers can read.
>>18692845You got him! Now address the main premise of his post.
>>18692869>argue with someone who hasn’t bothered to read the text and is willing to make things upFor what reason?
>>18692149>>18692158>>18692273>>18692435>>18692458The Exodus is a historical jigsaw. You have to put the pieces together. The trick is realizing the Hebrews at the time of the Exodus were not 'Hebrews' yet and that looking for evidence of Jews in Ancient Egypt is mistaken. An Exodus really did happen, they just weren't Hebrews.See picrel.Here's what actually happened>over time, asiatic/semitic nomadic people migrate into Egypt from the Levant>they move up in Egyptian society and become wealthy>they eventually take over as rulers of Egypt and become known as the Hyksos ('foreign rulers')>(this is Joseph and his family moving into Egypt and Joseph gaining favor with Pharaoh and becoming a ruler in Genesis)>at some point the Egyptian people violently expel the Hyksos and they flee back to the Levant>During this process (which is not a singular event but a long one) some of the semitic peoples who stayed, but are allied with the Hyksos that are being driven out in this long-term political upheavel and re-takeover by the Egyptians, are subjugated and made slaves/second-class citizens in Avaris>the Hyksos/the semites were polythiestic/had become Baal-Hadad/Set worshippers but a monothiestic priest of probably Kenite origin devoted to "Aten" decides to take over leadership of the enslaved Hyksos-semites in Avaris >this priest's name was likely originally [name of deity]mose i.e. 'son of [deity]' like Ahmose and Ramose>[name]mose leads the semites out to go and join the rest of the Hyksos and they travel to Canaan through Sinai>the priest's name simply becomes Mose and eventually "Aten" is revealed as/becomes known as YHWH (originally worshipped by the Kenites/Mose's ancestors) to the people although the culture tries to maintain Baal-Hadad (the golden calf) worship>(this is Exodus)>they eventually become part of Canaan and become known as 'Habiru' ('nomad' later Hebrew) as they raid cities>(this is Joshua, Judges etc)>the Kingdom of Israel is formed
>>18693778 • Timeline collapse. Hyksos expulsion is ~1550 BCE. Aten worship only exists under Akhenaten ~1350. The Shasu of YHW inscriptions are 14th–13th c. Pi-Ramesses (the "Raamses" of Exodus 1:11) is built ~1270. The earliest "Israel" (Merneptah stele) is ~1208. Your story needs an Aten priest at an event 200 years before Aten existed. Manetho actually tells two separate stories, the Hyksos and the much later Osarseph "lepers", and Josephus fused them; your reconstruction inherits that fusion rather than resolving it. • Habiru is older, not later. The term appears at Mari, Nuzi, Hattusa and Amarna from the 18th c. BCE onward, across the whole Near East, as a social label for displaced outsiders. Most philologists reject a direct etymological link to "Hebrew". It isn't something the group "became known as" after leaving Egypt. • Aten YHWH has no evidence. That's Freud's Moses and Monotheism, which specialists treat as psychoanalytic speculation. Aten was a solar disc cult; Yahweh's earliest profile (storm/warrior god from Seir/Teman/Midian) looks nothing like it. The Kenite/Midianite hypothesis is respectable on its own, but it doesn't need Aten and doesn't need the Hyksos. • Scale. The highland settlements where Israel first appears (~1200 BCE) show continuity with Canaanite material culture. No mass arrival from Egypt is visible.What most historians actually find defensible is smaller: Israel emerged largely from within Canaan; a limited group, possibly the Levites (the only tribe with Egyptian names: Moses, Phinehas, Hophni, Merari), plausibly did come out of Egypt, most likely in the 13th century under the Ramessides, when Asiatic 'apiru labor at Pi-Ramesses is documented; Yahweh entered via the south (the Kenite/Shasu link); and the Hyksos expulsion survived as a cultural memory of "Semites leaving Egypt" that later writers, including Manetho and Josephus, folded into the story.
>>18693778>>18694036The individual pieces are real (Hyksos, Habiru, Osarseph, Shasu of YHW, the Egyptian etymology of "Moses"), but the sequence you've built stacks about five separate hypotheses that don't fit together chronologically, and the archaeology doesn't support the overall shape.
>>18694036>>18694039thanks anon, very informative. It still means the Exodus actually did happen then, and that Moses is real and not actually a folkloric character.The Kenite connection with Moses is based on the fact that within the story, he flees Egypt to Midian, where he settles and is married and his father-in-law is a Kenite, and that is where he meets YHWH, the God of his ancestors.
>>18694036the story of Joseph being the same thing as the Hyksos' movement into Egypt and rise to power, and Joseph's descendants being the Hyksos rulers, and the enslaved Hebrews being the semitics who remained in Egypt, still works with these revisions (I dunno if this works with the timeframe of the Biblical genealogies though). It would simply mean this expulsion happens in the timeskip between Genesis and Exodus.
>>18694136>>18694154Hebrews were never enslaved in Egypt
>>18694036>>18694154this actually could work>Exodus 1>7 And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them.>(the Hyksos rise to power)>8 Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.>(Pharoh Ahmose, who rebelled and deposed the Hyksos)>9 And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we:>(because they rule over them from Avaris)>10 Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land.>(the expulsion)you could even go full Midrash-tier interpretation and say that the killing of all the Hebrew firstborn is some kind of analog to the expulsion, because the Hyksos are the 'firstborn/firstfruits' of the Exodus in some Pauline manner. Or perhaps it was simply a subjugation measure against the semitics that remained behind in Egypt in case they took power again in Avaris.
>>18694196refer back to the point about them not being known as Hebrew yet. >>18693778 Historically, they did have asiatics/levantines as slaves and workers at some point.
>>18694198>>18694209Your Exodus 1 mapping breaks on its own verses. Genesis has Joseph serving a Pharaoh, not being one. Exodus 1 has Israel as subjects under Egyptian kings before and after the "new king." Nowhere does the text have them ruling Egypt; you had to insert the Hyksos in parentheses because the verses don't say it. And you stopped quoting at verse 10. Verse 11 has these slaves building Pi-Ramesses, which didn't exist until ~1270 BCE, three centuries after Ahmose.The plots run in opposite directions. Exodus 1:10 has Pharaoh trying to stop them leaving. Ahmose was trying to make the Hyksos leave, and chased them to Sharuhen to finish the job. Losing a war and being expelled isn't slaves escaping.Your own theory also needs a priest of Aten in 1550 BCE. Aten doesn't exist until Akhenaten ~1350. And 'apiru show up at Mari and Alalakh from ~1800 BCE, before the Hyksos, across the whole Near East. It's a social class, not Hyksos descendants.Once you're at "Midrash-tier" typology and "in some Pauline manner," you've left history and conceded the literal text doesn't fit.My claim stands: Egypt catalogued foreign laborers by ethnicity and never once names Israelites or Hebrews.
>>18694286I don't need the Aten part to make it still work, I'm not necessarily factoring that in anymore. The Manetho story still works as some kind of cultural memory of the Exodus though; even in the initial post I was suggesting that *from the Egyptian POV when looking back at the events* Mose was a monotheistic Aten priest like Akhaten, not that he actually was.The habiru/apiru thing is also less of an issue than you think; it simply means they ascribed the pre-existing label to the people who became the Israelites once they heard about them sacking cities, and the name Hebrew was borne out of the pre-existing nomenclature at some point i.e. it was re-appropriated by the Israelites themselves once they became aware that they were being called Habiru/Apiru>Nowhere does the text have them ruling Egypt;Joseph is given rulership over a third of Egypt in Genesis and the opening lines to Exodus say that they 'became mighty' and 'mightier than we (the Egyptians)' how could they be mightier than the Egyptians if the Egyptians were ruling over them? Really makes you think>Verse 11 has these slaves building Pi-Ramesses, which didn't exist until ~1270 BCE, three centuries after Ahmosenot necessarily, see picrelFurthermore, who are the 'enemies' of Egypt that they are worried about the Hebrews joining forces with in the opening lines? The text never says, but if it is the semitic peoples outside Egypt in the Levant that the Hyksos are allied with, this would make sense, and further, subjugating the remaining semitics who didn't leave with the Hyksos with punitive measures and stripping them of rights so that they can't amass forces with the Hyksos outside who just left and enable them to re-invade is plausible
>>18694286also to clarify, since I noticed you for some reason attached that picrel on this post >>18694036 I am not JWanon or any other anons you responded to ITT, this >>18693778 was my first post ITT, so don't let that bias or cloud your judgement of my workshopping of a historical theory of Exodus, just in case that is why you are dismissive of the theory so far.
