Not necessarily. Most of the evidence actually supports a later date for the Exodus. The case for an early date is primarily based on taking the biblical numbers literally, such as 1 Kings 6:1, which mentions 480 years between the Exodus and the building of Solomon's temple. This is the main reason some argue for an early date, but archaeological and historical evidence, including references to the reign of Rameses II and other contextual details, points more towards a later date in the 13th century BCE.
It is probable that Ramses got it from the Israelites because he equates to Shishak. He probably took that image from what he saw in Jerusalem thinking, "Yeah, this will make me look like a god."
Your theory needs to be corrected. The Hebrews' exodus from Egypt occurred in c. 1463 BCE during the reign of Amenhotep II, instead of c. 1225 BCE during the reign of Ramses II.
@@SalvableRuin There is ZERO archeological evidence that the Exodus occurred. ZERO. The same evidence exists for Moses. ZERO. The story of Moses is derived from the Mesopotamian story Sargon of Akkad.
@@dominicpardo4783The Myth of Sargon you are referring to originated in the 6th century BC, which is centuries after Moses or the historical Exodus would’ve taken place. Your perception of the Exodus is skewed because you’re not grasping the context of what the event entails. The word Exodus comes from the Greek and it literally means “out of” or even “departure.” The entire point of the story is that the ancient Israelites left Egypt (or exited Egypt), and typically when you leave somewhere you don’t leave much behind. And as far as evidence goes all throughout Ancient Egyptian history there has always been a Semitic presence to some extent. It isn’t a matter of if the Israelites were there it’s a matter of when. And when it comes to written data (excluding the Bible) there is no reason to assume that the Ancient Egyptians would’ve ever documented such an embarrassment. Till this day we have no idea who won at the battle of Kadesh because both the Hittites and the Egyptians claimed victory, so why on earth would they ever admit that a miscellaneous foreign God freed their slaves and afflicted plagues upon them? Make it make sense. And we have substantial data all throughout the exodus account that accurately depicts Egyptian customs and culture. So in a nutshell the notion that the ancient Israelites were subjected to slavery under Egypt is well substantiated.
"be careful not to be ensnared by their ways after they have been destroyed before you. Do not inquire about their gods, asking, “How do these nations serve their gods? I will do likewise.” You must not worship the LORD your God in this way, because they practice for their gods every abomination which the LORD hates." - Dt 12:30-31a
Hebrews 8:5 states that the priests serving in the earthly tabernacle were performing their duties "a copy and shadow of what is in heaven." It goes on to say that when Moses was about to build the tabernacle, God warned him to make everything according to the pattern shown to him on the mountain (Exodus 25:40). This implies that the tabernacle Moses built on Earth was modelled after a heavenly reality. If the heavenly tabernacle resembles the earthly one, it existed before Egypt. If Egyptian gods revealed the heavenly tabernacle's design to the Egyptians, that could be the source of the Egyptian design mentioned here.
If one takes the "sons of God looked upon the daughters of men Gen 6:1-4 literal" then by all means yes. People forget God is the one who introduced the idea of there being a devil that opposes God and all the later generations of mankind. The KJV translation calls giants what later translations refer to as nephalim. God never chose to eliminate that wording from the texts. For sake of peer review that consideration was scoffed at and is still somewhat today. To whose advantage? God is not the author of confusion.
@@statutesofthelord That may be but it is insufficient to account for the Job 38:7 passage about the creation of the stars and the presence of the sons of God. Neither does it account for the "giants" that persisted prior and after the flood in Noah's day. Cain was not accorded great physical stature ether. Simple science is plain to wit that the source of humanity was not so great that Cain wandered off and suddenly found himself with a wife and children. It is obvious Eve had to have daughters and the sons of Adam had no Choice but to marry them. Cain was human and except for the eight on the Ark all of Cains children died in the flood of Noah's day. But God accounts that "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations which would discount any genetic carry over of Cains blood line. In the NASB and other English translations the Nephilim appear in Numbers 13:33 and are akin to the Anakim the KJV giants. Jude 1:6 refers to angles that departed from their place before God and in Ephesians 6:12 Paul specifies we wrestle not just with physical humanity but with spiritual entities who have influence in the world. God asserted in Genesis 3:15 that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the 'serpents' seed. There are issues God brings up. I do not think he does so in a light manner. Not the sons of Seth mating with the daughters of Cain does not account for nine to 10+ genetics. Human 'sons of God' did not exist biblically by definition prior to the account in Noah except that all men were "sons of God' because Adam was defined as the 'son of God. Thank you for affirming the position of Seth's sons marrying the daughters of Cain. It would seem only obvious that would happens but I do not see a specific verse indicating that. Do you have one you can share?
@@dustinpotter8312 dustin, Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? The Bible is clear who "sons of God" refers to: Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. People who say the Nephilim were the result of angels marrying humans are saying that the fallen angels were "led by the Spirit of God". But then, Jesus himself said that angels in heaven don't marry, so we know this strange error that angels married humans is not from God. There are several other errors involved with this strange idea that angels married humans, that attempts to refute the words of Jesus himself.
@@statutesofthelord Saying angels don't marry is not the same as saying they can't may be a minor point. It is however also not saying they did not rebel; Which we know happened. Genesis 6:2 says the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men. Jude 6 says the angels kept not their first estate. It is not incumbent on me whether or not you agree with the book "The Unseen Real" and I don't want to convey that idea. I did not pen it and there are a number of current "scholarly" people and claims, some of antiquity, that the book does allude to for further research. The host of heaven gathered in Job 1:6 and again Job 2:1 is evidence God had gatherings of the angels periodically because sinful man did not and does not have the ability to enter in the presence of God in his holiness. Jude 6 says some of those 'angels' left their estate and were reserved to a pit in some time of judgment yet we know from new testament text that demons/evil spirits dwelt in new testament times and that the devil is yet to be confined and his "seed" is yet to be revealed. Sons of God today are sons of God through the adoption of faith and that only became certified through the death of Jesus Christ and his resurrection. I don't think claiming the sons of God taking liberty with women in the Old Testament equates to the "sons of God" in the new testament as in two different families. Both created but of different origins. Other than the statement about angels marrying are there other verses that Jesus makes that should be considered in your per view? I ask in seriousness. I know people get "life in paradise" kind of mixed up thinking like the those that are married now will not be in the resurrection> Matthew 12:25. Thanks for your input. Blessings!
I love how you get to 'God made it look like an Egyptian tabernacle because he wanted to make it easy for them" instead of "Moses, a man with an Egyptian name (similar to Tutmoses although they're not the same guy), used an Egyptian tent because he was Egyptian. Same with the Ark, identical designs of which have been found in Egypt because arks were a thing that Egyptians made.
on a revised egyptian chronology ..... rameses ii is associated with reign of Amaziah in the 780s BC .... the temple of solomon would have been standing for at least 200 years by that time ....
At that time, I wouldn’t called them “Jewish people” because it sound like it is one tribe. I called them “the house of Israel” which is combined either 12 or 13 tribes.
"The Hebrew Children" has been a common or scholarly term in "religious circles" for generations and is synonymous with 'house of Israel.' That's a good call as Jew's refer to the 'tribes' that inhabited Jerusalem and captured by Babylon were mostly from the tribe of Judah and were predominantly those that returned to Israel... therefore "Jew's" historically. When the Lord returns they will be the Children/people of Israel once again. the "people of Israel" are not yet completely returned to the land of Israel.
Yes, you are correct. Only the House of Judah were referred to as "Jews", and that didn't happen until II Kings in the Bible. They were all referred to by their Tribal names.
There is an archaeologist named Douglas Petrovich that thinks Joseph was likely Sobekemhat and another name for him was Ankhu, the second in command to Amenemhat III which would have put the Exodus prior to Ramses II. Interestingly the name Joseph was given by Pharoah in the Bible was ZaphnathPaaneah. This was the Hebrew transliteration for the Egyptian Djedu en ef/Anku. This sounds like Zhedzooenef/Anku. Djedu en ef means He who is called- which was a formal name for a slave showing a change of name to Anku which means Life. Or in Hebrew Paanaeh which means He lives. E's in the Egyptian language are just place holders for vowel sounds and do not always even occur in the correct position for the word or name thus the nonconformity with the english E sound. Thus the vowel sounds could come written in positions that do not match the sound of the name. That is why the name sounds like ZatENaf. And during the time of Ankhu and Amenemhat there was a 7 year famine. They also say that is when the channel of Yusef (Joseph) was built. Dr Petrovich also shows some Heiroglyphs that talk about Sobekemhat's 2 sons Ephraim and Manasseh. And there was even a sigil ring found, as well as the inscription on the mastaba saying he was the controller of all of Egypt or something like that. Which is also what the Bible says.
The temple at Abu Simbel is constructed using principles of sacred geometry. Most temples around the world are. The Jewish temple is no different. Sacred geometry everywhere in it. Ratios, proportions, angles, and shapes. It's not surprising that there are similarities.
What you see is the battle commanders H.Q. You have the organizers outside the commanders private quarters. The Tabernacle is far more complex. However, God comes through as the commander of the Hebrew people. They often stare at the door of the place of meeting. Everyone looks to the commander to know what to do. Inside is the Ark with the covenant of God indide. It say DO NOT DO THIS AND THIS ETC. This means that God is in command and you follow God's desires rather than yours. They follow behind the Ark when they travel and camp around it in designated areas when they stop.
Another point: this and other Egyptian style things plus all the Egyptian loan words in the Torah serve as evidence that it was in fact written in Moses' day by people at least somewhat contemporary to the events depicted. There have been scholars trying to make a case (the JEPD documentary hypothesis) that the Torah wasn't written until the monarchy period, but it would be rather hard to explain why people in that period would have shown such Egyptian influences -- or even to have known about them by any method other than that they were handed down in what was already written. Just looking at the Torah as history without caring about religious implications, there are several parts that indicate it had to be written by an individual or a group strongly influenced by an individual who was familiar with what an Egyptian royal person of that time would have known. And one would think if there were such an individual, the Hebrews would have mentioned who it was. Lo and behold, they did.
I would like to present a different hypothesis. I would suggest that the accepted dates for the Exodus are off by quite a bit. Refer to the documentary patterns of evidence by Tim Mahoney. If anyone copied I would suggest that because of the renowned from years before that Ramses may have gotten it from the Israelites.
Very interesting, Brandon. We forget to think in the context of that time. The Israelites by that time had thought of themselves as Egyptians. Just like we call ourselves Americans because we live here. The people were there 400 years, just as we have been America 400 years. Observe our behavior today, and you'll find the same behavior back then. We forget our roots and our past. They would have taken on the customs and the language of Egypt by then. If one is looking for "Hebrew things, " they are disguised by the Egyptian symbols. "A new king who knew not Joseph" arose to power. The former things of Joseph's reign were being forgotten by the people, but a few Levites and others carried on the knowledge. Moses didn't understand who he was at that time.
Sorry, God delivered Irael long before Ramses. The Ramses stele depicts Israel as a people he defeated in battle. The Israelites were already in Canan!
This is no better than the theories that were around in the seventies about God being an astronaut based on ancient carved stones. This likewise is just a theory based on assumptions.
I really enjoy this channel and I know you do everything from a protestant point of view but it should be worth mentioning that only the Catholic Church has a tabernacle. In fact, every Catholic has a tabernacle.
I've been Christian my entire life. I've been an Egyptologist for over 30 years. Other than a vague shape of a tent these have nothing else in common. It's true the Ark was in the shape of an Egyptian Barque but that's where the similarities end.
yes. furthermore, if you take the biblical narrative at face value, using the assyrian eponym canon and book of kings, you can deduce that exodus was wednesday 25th march 1446 bc (jdn 1193355.315972) this is verified 40 years later with the eclipse of the battle of gibeon on wednesday 14th july 1406 bc (jdn1208076.149306) at 91% obscuration. there is no eclipse if the bible was wrong in its chronology. we can also deduce from joshua that an earthquake happened immediately before the crossing of the river jordan in 1406 bc. this can be shown if a geological survey of core samples is made in and around the dead sea, with several cores cross-calibrated to identify each year in the strata. egyptian chronology it is off by 334 years. absolute dating of egyptian chronology should be done using astronomical anchor points. as per nabta playa and the astronomical presentation of james lowdermilk, 1 thoth of the the sothic calendar began on friday 20th july 4243 bc (jdn 171868). several dynasties were concurrent especially in the new kingdom. ramses ii was shishak
It also doesn’t help their argument that this is a Ramses II inscription considering it is most likely he came 200 years after the Exodus. Maybe he stole it from the Hebrews.
I don't agree with this. The earthly tabernacle was a copy of the heavenly one. Maybe it's possible that the Nephilim brought the idea down to earth from what they saw in heaven and that a corrupted version was built in Egypt.
That Egyptian picture has nothing to do with the Tabernacle of God. Just because two things look a lot a like doesn't mean they have anything to do with each other.
It is only natural that a nomadic tribe from the Levant would have cultural similarities with a superpower to its north or a superpower to its south. The Sumerian Gilgamesh becomes the Hebrew Noah. Egyptian temples except for writing on walls inside and outside are similar in look to depictions of the temple in Jerusalem. Egyptian temples have a Holy of Holies with an ark but in their case, it is a boat containing a statue of a god. Later in Christianity, we see the symbol of the pagan Celtic sun god become the Celtic cross, the shamrock teaches the Trinity, Roman household gods become patron saints for worshipers to focus their devotion, and on and on. Sometimes, we can see the differences: Under Moses, the priestly class are instructed to keep their hair long contrasting with the bald Egyptian priests. A seven-day week remembering creation contrasts with the Egyptian 10-day week. Even Rameses in the story is the pharaoh that many scholars say ruled during the Exodus even if a lot of the timing and archelogy do not line up.
Dear Brandon: Please read a very serious English archeologist and historian called David Rohl, (and many others), say that the Egyptian chronology is should be reviewed and that the Pharaoh of Moses wasn't Ramses II but that he was the Pharaoh and rival of our great King Salomón. David Rohl, has many books published. A Test of Time (1995), Legend (1998), The Lost Testament (2002), The Lords of Avaris (2007), Exodus - Myth or History? Blessings to you. I love your comments, but I do agree with Mr. Rohl.
@anacontreras8596 I am an Egyptologist and David Rohls theory is the most likely to be correct. It's a NoNo to admit this in Egyptology but the truth is the truth.
It seems like you are teaching that Moses built the sanctuary according to what they saw the Egyptians doing. How does that line up with scripture? Specifically: Exodus 25:9; 25:40; 26:30 ..? I would like to suggest that the Egyptians got their idea of a heavenly throne image from one who had been there once, who had walked among the fiery stones of the courts above, but was thrown down. He was Egypt's true god and he wanted to be like the Most High. But Moses' model (pattern) did not come from any Egyptian inspiration, that's not what the Bible teaches. Does that make sense?
You should read "The Unseen Realm" by Michael Heiser. God is not the only one who knows what what heaven looks like."Horace" would be one of the sons of God or watchers a fallen divine personage whether or not that is the real name of the fallen spirit. Those beings would convey what they knew. Aspiring to be like God they would give instructions to their heathen prophets. Remember the devil can appear as an angel of light. I am not saying that is what happened. But in light of many people speaking of spirit beings. It is an idea to consider.
I agree with you, that more people should read Dr. Heiser’s books and educate themselves on current and ongoing archeological, biblical and ancient near eastern cultural research.
@@oekmama Not that I am being critical of any translation yet it is wise to remember all of them were translated by men who in their greatest effort had to make choices concerning words translations are lacking or inept given preconceived notions. Some of Hebrew descent prefer to call the sons of God Children of Seth but Job spoke of the sons of God (Vs 38:7) before man had been made if one follows a critical sequential linear path of the account of creation in early Genesis. In today's culture it seems popular to criticize God's moral supremacy concerning his guidance in the total destruction of certain peoples in Canaan. That those peoples might be genetic hybrids of Gods spiritual enemies and therefore ours as well is not hardly brought into focus. That being said and since our warfare is "spiritual" it is reasonable to examine the source and intent of that reasoning. As we know there are no scriptural inferences on earth of doubt of God before the Garden of Eden incident. Paganism has reared it head once again eve in today's "enlightened" cultures. Jonathan Cahn's book "Return of the God's" is more than reason enough to consider they were never really put down beyond the first century and are incorporated in modern church practices.
@@dustinpotter8312 dr Heiser’s discussion of the intricacies of translation really opened my eyes to how the difference of a few words can change understanding. That is why I recommend every Christian should follow the work of the researchers in the field. Especially with the “sons of God/Seth/Israel” discussion, there were also 1st and 2nd century politics behind the choice in translations, with the budding rabbinic Judaism choosing one translation to distance themselves from the proto-Christian sect that still called themselves The Way. And honestly, the way people refuse to follow the facts and strenuously cling to their preconceived notions, does make me wonder if there is also a part of that spiritual warfare. On the other hand never before have we had such technology and archeological advances that prove the Bible as a historical text.
Clearly YHWH told Ramesses how to design HIS tabernacle and ark! Why on earth would God copy the pharaoh's homework on the most holy place? To make it easy for Israel? Not really His style, is it?
These two don't realize just how they are denying The Holy One Creator of all things that exist. As if The Holy One hasn't planned ahead for all things. Notice before the physical universe was created. The angelic beings were created a long time before (Job 38:7). Angelic beings were all governed by three created archangels. The 3 Archangels each governed over 1/3 of the angels Well we know Lucifer was created the most powerful of the 3 having talents and knowledge which is power. Lucifer was given the earth as his throne along with 1/3 third. To beautify earth by his Creator's Holy Spirit. Which we know Lucifer later rebelled against Holiness (Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:13-17). Thus "evil" destruction and chaos began within the universe and the spiritual realm coming out of Lucifer. Later in time after the rebellion The Holy One planned to create a temporary physical life image of Himself. Adam was by obedience and living by His Holy Spirit to EARN the title redeemer of earth and dethrone Lucifer. Adam failed! Lucifer (Satan) is the father of counterfeit/lies/deception while knowing God's plans. What was of Egypt (sin) was obviously influenced by Satan for deception and to weaken future faith of The Almighty. And those two presenters are just a tool used by Satan (2 Cor. 4:4; Ephesians 2:2; Rev. 12:9) to do Lucifer's work.
@@mustangdru As did also for Joseph and later his brothers and his father Jacob. Later in time the exodus of Israel tribes from Egypt represents Israel "coming out of sin".
Another fascinating I had heard about the Tabernacle, it's shape, and Jesus is the instruction God gives the people where to put their tents. Tribes to the north, the south, the east, and the west. Taking into consideration the size of the tribes, this giant camp would give an appearance of the cross. A picture which Balaam probable got to view when guided to the places from which he was to curse the people of Israel. I have not been able to verify this information, but I have learned: If it seems impossible, God will use it to teach those willing to see and hear.
I thought you were a Christian, don’t you know God is Sovereign? He created good and evil for his purpose, he has never been influenced by man. He created ALL through Christ, you will see the truth at the Great White Throne unless he reveals it to you prior.
That’s a lot of hogwash. I just don’t agree with that. God does not get his ideas for his holy temple, which is already in existence in heaven from some pagan worshipers. It’s also very wrong to say that the pagan beliefs in Egypt was all they knew. The Jews have always been very good to know the teachings of their forefathers. I am not saying they were faithfully serving God while in Egypt. I’m just saying that Egypt was not all they knew.
![Yeat & Summrs - GO2WORK [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/NEFEwfPcXRA/mqdefault.jpg)
The issue I have with this is that Ramses was most likely NOT the Pharoah of the Exodus which most likely happened hundreds of years before.
I agree with this. This idea all assumes a late date for the exodus despite the clear math in scripture. Perhaps Ramses got his idea from the Hebrews.
Not necessarily. Most of the evidence actually supports a later date for the Exodus. The case for an early date is primarily based on taking the biblical numbers literally, such as 1 Kings 6:1, which mentions 480 years between the Exodus and the building of Solomon's temple. This is the main reason some argue for an early date, but archaeological and historical evidence, including references to the reign of Rameses II and other contextual details, points more towards a later date in the 13th century BCE.
Ramses II was
Solomon's father-in-law. The Septuagint, Josephus, and the Amarna Letters agree.
@@isaacsimmonds3119There are no references to Ramses II during the era of the Exodus. There are references to him living during the time of Solomon.
It is probable that Ramses got it from the Israelites because he equates to Shishak. He probably took that image from what he saw in Jerusalem thinking, "Yeah, this will make me look like a god."
Your theory needs to be corrected. The Hebrews' exodus from Egypt occurred in c. 1463 BCE during the reign of Amenhotep II, instead of c. 1225 BCE during the reign of Ramses II.
Moses didn't exist, and the Exodus never happened.
@@dominicpardo4783 The exodus did happen, and Moses is one of the greatest men who ever lived. Stop embarrassing yourself.
@@SalvableRuin There is ZERO archeological evidence that the Exodus occurred. ZERO. The same evidence exists for Moses. ZERO. The story of Moses is derived from the Mesopotamian story Sargon of Akkad.
@@dominicpardo4783 Mathew 17:3 is all the evidence I need.
@@dominicpardo4783The Myth of Sargon you are referring to originated in the 6th century BC, which is centuries after Moses or the historical Exodus would’ve taken place. Your perception of the Exodus is skewed because you’re not grasping the context of what the event entails. The word Exodus comes from the Greek and it literally means “out of” or even “departure.” The entire point of the story is that the ancient Israelites left Egypt (or exited Egypt), and typically when you leave somewhere you don’t leave much behind. And as far as evidence goes all throughout Ancient Egyptian history there has always been a Semitic presence to some extent. It isn’t a matter of if the Israelites were there it’s a matter of when. And when it comes to written data (excluding the Bible) there is no reason to assume that the Ancient Egyptians would’ve ever documented such an embarrassment. Till this day we have no idea who won at the battle of Kadesh because both the Hittites and the Egyptians claimed victory, so why on earth would they ever admit that a miscellaneous foreign God freed their slaves and afflicted plagues upon them? Make it make sense. And we have substantial data all throughout the exodus account that accurately depicts Egyptian customs and culture. So in a nutshell the notion that the ancient Israelites were subjected to slavery under Egypt is well substantiated.
Ramses II was Solomon's father-in-law. He was not alive during the Exodus.
"be careful not to be ensnared by their ways after they have been destroyed before you. Do not inquire about their gods, asking, “How do these nations serve their gods? I will do likewise.” You must not worship the LORD your God in this way, because they practice for their gods every abomination which the LORD hates." - Dt 12:30-31a
Hebrews 8:5 states that the priests serving in the earthly tabernacle were performing their duties "a copy and shadow of what is in heaven." It goes on to say that when Moses was about to build the tabernacle, God warned him to make everything according to the pattern shown to him on the mountain (Exodus 25:40). This implies that the tabernacle Moses built on Earth was modelled after a heavenly reality.
If the heavenly tabernacle resembles the earthly one, it existed before Egypt. If Egyptian gods revealed the heavenly tabernacle's design to the Egyptians, that could be the source of the Egyptian design mentioned here.
If one takes the "sons of God looked upon the daughters of men Gen 6:1-4 literal" then by all means yes. People forget God is the one who introduced the idea of there being a devil that opposes God and all the later generations of mankind. The KJV translation calls giants what later translations refer to as nephalim. God never chose to eliminate that wording from the texts. For sake of peer review that consideration was scoffed at and is still somewhat today. To whose advantage? God is not the author of confusion.
@@dustinpotter8312 dustin, Yes, the righteous sons of Seth's line married into the wicked line of Cain.
@@statutesofthelord That may be but it is insufficient to account for the Job 38:7 passage about the creation of the stars and the presence of the sons of God. Neither does it account for the "giants" that persisted prior and after the flood in Noah's day.
Cain was not accorded great physical stature ether. Simple science is plain to wit that the source of humanity was not so great that Cain wandered off and suddenly found himself with a wife and children. It is obvious Eve had to have daughters and the sons of Adam had no Choice but to marry them.
Cain was human and except for the eight on the Ark all of Cains children died in the flood of Noah's day. But God accounts that "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations which would discount any genetic carry over of Cains blood line.
In the NASB and other English translations the Nephilim appear in Numbers 13:33 and are akin to the Anakim the KJV giants. Jude 1:6 refers to angles that departed from their place before God and in Ephesians 6:12 Paul specifies we wrestle not just with physical humanity but with spiritual entities who have influence in the world. God asserted in Genesis 3:15 that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the 'serpents' seed. There are issues God brings up. I do not think he does so in a light manner.
Not the sons of Seth mating with the daughters of Cain does not account for nine to 10+ genetics. Human 'sons of God' did not exist biblically by definition prior to the account in Noah except that all men were "sons of God' because Adam was defined as the 'son of God.
Thank you for affirming the position of Seth's sons marrying the daughters of Cain. It would seem only obvious that would happens but I do not see a specific verse indicating that. Do you have one you can share?
@@dustinpotter8312 dustin, Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
The Bible is clear who "sons of God" refers to: Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
People who say the Nephilim were the result of angels marrying humans are saying that the fallen angels were "led by the Spirit of God".
But then, Jesus himself said that angels in heaven don't marry, so we know this strange error that angels married humans is not from God.
There are several other errors involved with this strange idea that angels married humans, that attempts to refute the words of Jesus himself.
@@statutesofthelord Saying angels don't marry is not the same as saying they can't may be a minor point. It is however also not saying they did not rebel; Which we know happened. Genesis 6:2 says the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men. Jude 6 says the angels kept not their first estate.
It is not incumbent on me whether or not you agree with the book "The Unseen Real" and I don't want to convey that idea. I did not pen it and there are a number of current "scholarly" people and claims, some of antiquity, that the book does allude to for further research. The host of heaven gathered in Job 1:6 and again Job 2:1 is evidence God had gatherings of the angels periodically because sinful man did not and does not have the ability to enter in the presence of God in his holiness. Jude 6 says some of those 'angels' left their estate and were reserved to a pit in some time of judgment yet we know from new testament text that demons/evil spirits dwelt in new testament times and that the devil is yet to be confined and his "seed" is yet to be revealed.
Sons of God today are sons of God through the adoption of faith and that only became certified through the death of Jesus Christ and his resurrection. I don't think claiming the sons of God taking liberty with women in the Old Testament equates to the "sons of God" in the new testament as in two different families. Both created but of different origins.
Other than the statement about angels marrying are there other verses that Jesus makes that should be considered in your per view? I ask in seriousness. I know people get "life in paradise" kind of mixed up thinking like the those that are married now will not be in the resurrection> Matthew 12:25. Thanks for your input. Blessings!
I love how you get to 'God made it look like an Egyptian tabernacle because he wanted to make it easy for them" instead of "Moses, a man with an Egyptian name (similar to Tutmoses although they're not the same guy), used an Egyptian tent because he was Egyptian.
Same with the Ark, identical designs of which have been found in Egypt because arks were a thing that Egyptians made.
on a revised egyptian chronology ..... rameses ii is associated with reign of Amaziah in the 780s BC ....
the temple of solomon would have been standing for at least 200 years by that time ....
At that time, I wouldn’t called them “Jewish people” because it sound like it is one tribe. I called them “the house of Israel” which is combined either 12 or 13 tribes.
"The Hebrew Children" has been a common or scholarly term in "religious circles" for generations and is synonymous with 'house of Israel.' That's a good call as Jew's refer to the 'tribes' that inhabited Jerusalem and captured by Babylon were mostly from the tribe of Judah and were predominantly those that returned to Israel... therefore "Jew's" historically. When the Lord returns they will be the Children/people of Israel once again. the "people of Israel" are not yet completely returned to the land of Israel.
Yes, you are correct. Only the House of Judah were referred to as "Jews", and that didn't happen until II Kings in the Bible.
They were all referred to by their Tribal names.
There is an archaeologist named Douglas Petrovich that thinks Joseph was likely Sobekemhat and another name for him was Ankhu, the second in command to Amenemhat III which would have put the Exodus prior to Ramses II. Interestingly the name Joseph was given by Pharoah in the Bible was ZaphnathPaaneah. This was the Hebrew transliteration for the Egyptian Djedu en ef/Anku. This sounds like Zhedzooenef/Anku. Djedu en ef means He who is called- which was a formal name for a slave showing a change of name to Anku which means Life. Or in Hebrew Paanaeh which means He lives. E's in the Egyptian language are just place holders for vowel sounds and do not always even occur in the correct position for the word or name thus the nonconformity with the english E sound. Thus the vowel sounds could come written in positions that do not match the sound of the name. That is why the name sounds like ZatENaf.
And during the time of Ankhu and Amenemhat there was a 7 year famine. They also say that is when the channel of Yusef (Joseph) was built. Dr Petrovich also shows some Heiroglyphs that talk about Sobekemhat's 2 sons Ephraim and Manasseh. And there was even a sigil ring found, as well as the inscription on the mastaba saying he was the controller of all of Egypt or something like that. Which is also what the Bible says.
Ramses was probably not the Pharaoh of the Exodus.
The temple at Abu Simbel is constructed using principles of sacred geometry. Most temples around the world are. The Jewish temple is no different. Sacred geometry everywhere in it.
Ratios, proportions, angles, and shapes. It's not surprising that there are similarities.
The idea of portable temples made sense in the context of the desert.
5:17 - The way you explained this part blew my mind! 🔥 Such a cool connection between archaeology and modern science!
What you see is the battle commanders H.Q.
You have the organizers outside the commanders private quarters.
The Tabernacle is far more complex.
However, God comes through as the commander of the Hebrew people. They often stare at the door of the place of meeting.
Everyone looks to the commander to know what to do.
Inside is the Ark with the covenant of God indide.
It say DO NOT DO THIS AND THIS ETC.
This means that God is in command and you follow God's desires rather than yours.
They follow behind the Ark when they travel and camp around it in designated areas when they stop.
Another point: this and other Egyptian style things plus all the Egyptian loan words in the Torah serve as evidence that it was in fact written in Moses' day by people at least somewhat contemporary to the events depicted. There have been scholars trying to make a case (the JEPD documentary hypothesis) that the Torah wasn't written until the monarchy period, but it would be rather hard to explain why people in that period would have shown such Egyptian influences -- or even to have known about them by any method other than that they were handed down in what was already written.
Just looking at the Torah as history without caring about religious implications, there are several parts that indicate it had to be written by an individual or a group strongly influenced by an individual who was familiar with what an Egyptian royal person of that time would have known. And one would think if there were such an individual, the Hebrews would have mentioned who it was. Lo and behold, they did.
I would like to present a different hypothesis. I would suggest that the accepted dates for the Exodus are off by quite a bit. Refer to the documentary patterns of evidence by Tim Mahoney. If anyone copied I would suggest that because of the renowned from years before that Ramses may have gotten it from the Israelites.
Very interesting, Brandon. We forget to think in the context of that time. The Israelites by that time had thought of themselves as Egyptians. Just like we call ourselves Americans because we live here. The people were there 400 years, just as we have been America 400 years. Observe our behavior today, and you'll find the same behavior back then. We forget our roots and our past.
They would have taken on the customs and the language of Egypt by then. If one is looking for "Hebrew things, " they are disguised by the Egyptian symbols.
"A new king who knew not Joseph" arose to power. The former things of Joseph's reign were being forgotten by the people, but a few Levites and others carried on the knowledge. Moses didn't understand who he was at that time.
As bad as it is,we can't say that the world would be better without humans.
Thank you for sharing. I learn so much from you. May God bless you and your family indeed. Amen
Very interesting. Enjoy your videos. Keep up the great work that you do.
Wow! That sounds amazing Brandon.
Sorry, God delivered Irael long before Ramses. The Ramses stele depicts Israel as a people he defeated in battle. The Israelites were already in Canan!
I'd like to go on one of your trips to the Holy Land, but why are you going in August next year, with extreme summer temperatures of 40 degrees?
This is no better than the theories that were around in the seventies about God being an astronaut based on ancient carved stones. This likewise is just a theory based on assumptions.
I really enjoy this channel and I know you do everything from a protestant point of view but it should be worth mentioning that only the Catholic Church has a tabernacle. In fact, every Catholic has a tabernacle.
I've been Christian my entire life. I've been an Egyptologist for over 30 years. Other than a vague shape of a tent these have nothing else in common. It's true the Ark was in the shape of an Egyptian Barque but that's where the similarities end.
I think this comparison is a stretch.
yes. furthermore, if you take the biblical narrative at face value, using the assyrian eponym canon and book of kings, you can deduce that exodus was wednesday 25th march 1446 bc (jdn 1193355.315972) this is verified 40 years later with the eclipse of the battle of gibeon on wednesday 14th july 1406 bc (jdn1208076.149306) at 91% obscuration. there is no eclipse if the bible was wrong in its chronology. we can also deduce from joshua that an earthquake happened immediately before the crossing of the river jordan in 1406 bc. this can be shown if a geological survey of core samples is made in and around the dead sea, with several cores cross-calibrated to identify each year in the strata.
egyptian chronology it is off by 334 years. absolute dating of egyptian chronology should be done using astronomical anchor points. as per nabta playa and the astronomical presentation of james lowdermilk, 1 thoth of the the sothic calendar began on friday 20th july 4243 bc (jdn 171868). several dynasties were concurrent especially in the new kingdom. ramses ii was shishak
It also doesn’t help their argument that this is a Ramses II inscription considering it is most likely he came 200 years after the Exodus. Maybe he stole it from the Hebrews.
@@jonkepko9217 exactly
Yes! And is possible, if not likely, that Rameses was not the Pharoah of the exodus.
Ultimate Repurposing: Bread & wine, body & blood
Hi from South Africa Brandon.
i missed this one. i am watching now
I don't agree with this. The earthly tabernacle was a copy of the heavenly one.
Maybe it's possible that the Nephilim brought the idea down to earth from what they saw in heaven and that a corrupted version was built in Egypt.
That Egyptian picture has nothing to do with the Tabernacle of God. Just because two things look a lot a like doesn't mean they have anything to do with each other.
Did God not tell prophet Nathan that Solomon would build the Temple because King David had shed to much blood? How about Ezikiel chapter 40-48?
It is only natural that a nomadic tribe from the Levant would have cultural similarities with a superpower to its north or a superpower to its south. The Sumerian Gilgamesh becomes the Hebrew Noah. Egyptian temples except for writing on walls inside and outside are similar in look to depictions of the temple in Jerusalem. Egyptian temples have a Holy of Holies with an ark but in their case, it is a boat containing a statue of a god. Later in Christianity, we see the symbol of the pagan Celtic sun god become the Celtic cross, the shamrock teaches the Trinity, Roman household gods become patron saints for worshipers to focus their devotion, and on and on. Sometimes, we can see the differences: Under Moses, the priestly class are instructed to keep their hair long contrasting with the bald Egyptian priests. A seven-day week remembering creation contrasts with the Egyptian 10-day week. Even Rameses in the story is the pharaoh that many scholars say ruled during the Exodus even if a lot of the timing and archelogy do not line up.
I’ve never noticed this before when I noticed the picture. This is cool.
Dear Brandon: Please read a very serious English archeologist and historian called David Rohl, (and many others), say that the Egyptian chronology is should be reviewed and that the Pharaoh of Moses wasn't Ramses II but that he was the Pharaoh and rival of our great King Salomón. David Rohl, has many books published.
A Test of Time (1995), Legend (1998), The Lost Testament (2002), The Lords of Avaris (2007), Exodus - Myth or History?
Blessings to you. I love your comments, but I do agree with Mr. Rohl.
@anacontreras8596 I am an Egyptologist and David Rohls theory is the most likely to be correct. It's a NoNo to admit this in Egyptology but the truth is the truth.
It seems like you are teaching that Moses built the sanctuary according to what they saw the Egyptians doing.
How does that line up with scripture? Specifically: Exodus 25:9; 25:40; 26:30 ..?
I would like to suggest that the Egyptians got their idea of a heavenly throne image from one who had been there once, who had walked among the fiery stones of the courts above, but was thrown down. He was Egypt's true god and he wanted to be like the Most High.
But Moses' model (pattern) did not come from any Egyptian inspiration, that's not what the Bible teaches.
Does that make sense?
This is the very definition of a polemic use in scripture.
You should read "The Unseen Realm" by Michael Heiser. God is not the only one who knows what what heaven looks like."Horace" would be one of the sons of God or watchers a fallen divine personage whether or not that is the real name of the fallen spirit. Those beings would convey what they knew. Aspiring to be like God they would give instructions to their heathen prophets. Remember the devil can appear as an angel of light. I am not saying that is what happened. But in light of many people speaking of spirit beings. It is an idea to consider.
I agree with you, that more people should read Dr. Heiser’s books and educate themselves on current and ongoing archeological, biblical and ancient near eastern cultural research.
@@oekmama Not that I am being critical of any translation yet it is wise to remember all of them were translated by men who in their greatest effort had to make choices concerning words translations are lacking or inept given preconceived notions. Some of Hebrew descent prefer to call the sons of God Children of Seth but Job spoke of the sons of God (Vs 38:7) before man had been made if one follows a critical sequential linear path of the account of creation in early Genesis.
In today's culture it seems popular to criticize God's moral supremacy concerning his guidance in the total destruction of certain peoples in Canaan. That those peoples might be genetic hybrids of Gods spiritual enemies and therefore ours as well is not hardly brought into focus. That being said and since our warfare is "spiritual" it is reasonable to examine the source and intent of that reasoning. As we know there are no scriptural inferences on earth of doubt of God before the Garden of Eden incident. Paganism has reared it head once again eve in today's "enlightened" cultures. Jonathan Cahn's book "Return of the God's" is more than reason enough to consider they were never really put down beyond the first century and are incorporated in modern church practices.
@@dustinpotter8312 dr Heiser’s discussion of the intricacies of translation really opened my eyes to how the difference of a few words can change understanding. That is why I recommend every Christian should follow the work of the researchers in the field. Especially with the “sons of God/Seth/Israel” discussion, there were also 1st and 2nd century politics behind the choice in translations, with the budding rabbinic Judaism choosing one translation to distance themselves from the proto-Christian sect that still called themselves The Way.
And honestly, the way people refuse to follow the facts and strenuously cling to their preconceived notions, does make me wonder if there is also a part of that spiritual warfare. On the other hand never before have we had such technology and archeological advances that prove the Bible as a historical text.
Clearly YHWH told Ramesses how to design HIS tabernacle and ark! Why on earth would God copy the pharaoh's homework on the most holy place? To make it easy for Israel? Not really His style, is it?
Don't look alike to me but okay.
Ramses was not the pharaoh of the exodus.
Writing the tea leafs again
No it’s not disproving anything. Once saying bible disproved I’m out. I know Jesus I know God and the Holy Spirit. He makes no mistakes.
Won't that trip be a bit dangerous? Keep safe if you are still going.
Hello Brandon
These two don't realize just how they are denying The Holy One Creator of all things that exist. As if The Holy One hasn't planned ahead for all things.
Notice before the physical universe was created. The angelic beings were created a long time before (Job 38:7). Angelic beings were all governed by three created archangels. The 3 Archangels each governed over 1/3 of the angels
Well we know Lucifer was created the most powerful of the 3 having talents and knowledge which is power. Lucifer was given the earth as his throne along with 1/3 third. To beautify earth by his Creator's Holy Spirit. Which we know Lucifer later rebelled against Holiness (Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:13-17). Thus "evil" destruction and chaos began within the universe and the spiritual realm coming out of Lucifer.
Later in time after the rebellion The Holy One planned to create a temporary physical life image of Himself. Adam was by obedience and living by His Holy Spirit to EARN the title redeemer of earth and dethrone Lucifer. Adam failed!
Lucifer (Satan) is the father of counterfeit/lies/deception while knowing God's plans. What was of Egypt (sin) was obviously influenced by Satan for deception and to weaken future faith of The Almighty. And those two presenters are just a tool used by Satan (2 Cor. 4:4; Ephesians 2:2; Rev. 12:9) to do Lucifer's work.
@@EJleongardien Egypt also offered Jesus sanctuary when he needed it.
@@mustangdru As did also for Joseph and later his brothers and his father Jacob. Later in time the exodus of Israel tribes from Egypt represents Israel "coming out of sin".
Another fascinating I had heard about the Tabernacle, it's shape, and Jesus is the instruction God gives the people where to put their tents. Tribes to the north, the south, the east, and the west. Taking into consideration the size of the tribes, this giant camp would give an appearance of the cross. A picture which Balaam probable got to view when guided to the places from which he was to curse the people of Israel. I have not been able to verify this information, but I have learned: If it seems impossible, God will use it to teach those willing to see and hear.
Death on a cross is not something special to just Jesus. This doesn't make any logical sense.
@@GEES44DC Prophecy has never made "logical sense. Thanks for your response.
@@petervogel2350 Balaam would have made absolutely no connection.
@@GEES44DC Of course not, but we can. 'Tis that ol' 20/20 hindsight at prophecy - like in archeological finds.
Ramsey had a pretty big ego back then
I thought you were a Christian, don’t you know God is Sovereign? He created good and evil for his purpose, he has never been influenced by man. He created ALL through Christ, you will see the truth at the Great White Throne unless he reveals it to you prior.
That’s a lot of hogwash. I just don’t agree with that. God does not get his ideas for his holy temple, which is already in existence in heaven from some pagan worshipers.
It’s also very wrong to say that the pagan beliefs in Egypt was all they knew. The Jews have always been very good to know the teachings of their forefathers. I am not saying they were faithfully serving God while in Egypt. I’m just saying that Egypt was not all they knew.
You are a blessing, Thank you.