The Biblical EXODUS and the horribly flawed research that tries to debunk it

[Estrid]

Being wrong does not necessarily make you a fraud. It just makes you wrong. A lot of work went into the Turkey site, and in my opinion just came to the wrong conclusion.

What would or would not make Ron Wyatt a fraud is if his various stories are fabricated, which I don’t know for sure. Some seem plausible, and others don’t. His story about the Saudi Arabian detainment seems possible, but the story of the ark of the covenant doesn’t.

So you figure he made up the ark of covenant story or what?

 

[Estrid]

Being wrong does not necessarily make you a fraud. It just makes you wrong. A lot of work went into the Turkey site, and in my opinion just came to the wrong conclusion.

What would or would not make Ron Wyatt a fraud is if his various stories are fabricated, which I don’t know for sure. Some seem plausible, and others don’t. His story about the Saudi Arabian detainment seems possible, but the story of the ark of the covenant doesn’t.

Doesn't necessarily. How about if you sell bottles of "medicine "
guaranteed to cure cancer? Oops, wrong conclusion, jokes on me?

Whether Wyat was morally weak or simply insane, who
cares? He is dead now, but in general, if a guy can't tell a rock
from a boat, or badlands from a city, you gotta ask if any
" conclusion" is likely to be worth anything.

How about a doctor who can't tell a broken leg
from an earache? Trust him with your appendicitis?

 

[SuperCow]

So you figure he made up the ark of covenant story or what?

I find it very convenient that he comes up with explanations for why evidence that would support his claims keeps coming up missing, destroyed, or confiscated by authorities with agendas. It happens once. Okay. It happens twice. Hmmm. It happens three times (in three different countries no less). Now at this point it moves into conspiracy theory territory.

Well, it doesn't matter. Let's just write some books and sell some videos about all the evidence that is just out there that I can't let you see for yourself and nobody else outside my immediate family will corroborate for you. So the evidence and the incentive lead me to suspect (also with no evidence) that something is askew with Ron Wyatt's claims.

So all I am supporting is the idea that the real Mount Sinai is east of Aqaba, because the traditional maps of Israel's route to the wilderness are just as suspect to me, and do not jive with the Biblical text and any subsequent analysis of a map of the region.

 

[Estrid]

I find it very convenient that he comes up with explanations for why evidence that would support his claims keeps coming up missing, destroyed, or confiscated by authorities with agendas. It happens once. Okay. It happens twice. Hmmm. It happens three times (in three different countries no less). Now at this point it moves into conspiracy theory territory.

Well, it doesn't matter. Let's just write some books and sell some videos about all the evidence that is just out there that I can't let you see for yourself and nobody else outside my immediate family will corroborate for you. So the evidence and the incentive lead me to suspect (also with no evidence) that something is askew with Ron Wyatt's claims.

So all I am supporting is the idea that the real Mount Sinai is east of Aqaba, because the traditional maps of Israel's route to the wilderness are just as suspect to me, and do not jive with the Biblical text and any subsequent analysis of a map of the region.

Some years back a preacher from the USA got his church to
fund his expedition. Sure enough he found the ark, got some
wood samples even. Big announcement!

Sure enough, the Turkish authorities confiscated his
"artifacts",
How convenient, he doesn't have to show them and the
Turks "proved" it was Noah's ark when they confiscated them!

 

[Mosheli]

Re last replies on previous page.

1. We are not talking about Noah's Ark, or the Ark of the Covenant or any other of "Wyatt's" alleged discoveries, they don't prove anything for the exodus or Sea Passage or Sinai. And the only thing that matters is details matches evidences, not claims about a person's reputation/etc. Besides which Wyatt was not wrong/lying about everything because some things like his Joseph in the 3rd dynasty are able to be somewhat proven (I have more or less proven his Joseph placement in some articles). Moreover, the claims that some of them are fake or wrong/bogus are also disputable. Eg the claims that the Durupinar "Ark" nearby Dogubayzit is only a geological rock formation are not necessarily so definitely true as asserted. There are also other people involved in the Aqaba & Sinai claims other than just "Wyatt", including Josephus, Rene Norbergen, Ross Patterson, Bob Cornuke, plus related evidences of Velikovsky, etc.

2. I never posted any "flawed research" or "opinions". I posted details from bible and apparent matches in the area and history.

3. To repeat. 'Exodus' says numerous times they had "left Egypt" before the sea crossing. So that rules out the Suez or Bitter Lakes / Suez Canal area as the crossing place. Also the "Sinai" Peninsula is too small for 600000 + Israelites for 40 years. Exodus also says they went not by way of the Philistines. So that rules out the Mediterranean (which was never called Yam suph in bible anyway). It says they later turned back/aside (not as far as Egypt) and ended up entrapped in the land between sea and ranges and Egyptians. So this can only be on the west side of the Aqaba in the "Sinai" Peninsula.
Chariots parts and bones and pillar(s) have been found in the Aqaba nearby Nuweiba. No other parts have been found anywhere else all around the "Sinai" Peninsula. Despite claims that the parts are planted fakes or are from a shipwreck, there is no totally reliable proof or disproof that the parts are fake (ie the claims don't seem to me to be definite disproof/proof against then). The full version of the name 'Nuweiba Muza...' means something like "waters of Moses". The Aqaba is also called Yam Suph (usually translated "Red Sea" or "Reed Sea") in Kings in the bible. Josephus' account seems to match the Wadi Watir area. Yam Suph may have nothing to do with "reeds" (suph), it might mean something like "sea of the storm" or "sea of the end".
Remains have also been found in the Jebel/Mount Lawz or Maqla area that match some things at Sinai/Horeb in the bible.
Bible also says Sinai/Horeb was in Arabia. But this is not much help because Arabia is not just modern Saudi Arabia. In Roman times there were Arabia Petraea (roughly "Sinai" Peninsula, Jordan/Edom, Midian/nw Saudi Arabia), Arabia Deserta (roughly Saudi Arabia), and Arabia Felix (roughly Yemen/Aden/Hadhramaut/Himyar). But Midian is certainly in north-west Saudi Arabia. It is even marked as "Midyan" in my Collins Atlas. Burton's book on Midian also has Midian in the same area.

4. Goshen/Rameses is not Avaris, and probably not the northeast Nile Delta of Lower/North Egypt either. Goshen was "near to Joseph". The baby Moses was put in the Nile river and found by princess. There was no royal capital in the delta until the 14th dynasty. The n.e. delta is too close to Succoth and the Egyptian border re the exodus route. The 19th dynasty Pi-ramses is too late for Joseph & Moses, and the bible has no Pi- prefix. Pithom has other better candidate matches in the 12th dynasty and in Middle Egypt than the 19th dynasty one in the n.e. delta. Bible says Hebrews filled the land. Goshen was the best of the land, which might not fit the northeast delta. 'Eretz Goshen' "land of Goshen" is more likely to be Er-ges-her/Giza, or Agouza, near Cairo. Though it is possible that Goshen was the Delta (not just north-east delta) like Wyatt thought, since best of the land might match fertile delta.

5. AIG are not all-right all-good gods. Just because they denounce Wyatt doesn't mean they are right or truthful. Their denouncing of Wyatt might be for ingenuine or incorrect reasons. Besides which one has to cite & debate specific details evidences reasons why they disagree, not just say general vague unspecific claims. Anyway if one wants to argue by credentials and criticisms then AIG is denouced by geologist Lorence Collins.

6. Supposedly superior "experts" have not found or proven the exodus or Sea Crossing chariots (or Noah's Ark or Ark of the Covenant) etc. They even say they can "find no or little evidence for Joseph and Moses/exodus in Egyptian history" (in the dynasties and areas that they suppose they were in). So before you denounce someone like Wyatt as "non-expert" and worship others as "experts" just remember that the experts haven't proven much themselves. Many times in AD history revolutionary discoveries were made by some individual which proved all the previous reigning "experts" theories were wrong, but everyone forgets and continues to worship experts as all right gods and denounce other "non-experts" are all-wrong bad dogs. In the case of Moses and exodus in Egyptian history plenty of alternative scholars agree that the reason experts haven't found them is because the "experts" are wrong (or lying) about which dynasty and area they were in. So experts can be wrong or lying. Sure we have to have a certain amount of respect for modern expert methods and science etc, but they are not infallible gods. I have seen no reliable definite proofs that the chariots parts and bones and pillar(s) in the Aqaba are fakes, rather I see the biblical and historical/geographical evidence seems to support them. To me the only most compelling evidence against the Nuweiba crossing is the difficult terrain re 600000 Hebrews and 600 chariots travelling across the upper middle "Sinai" and through the Wadi Watir, but I can't dimiss all the other evidences that seem to support it.

 

[Estrid]

Re last replies on previous page.

1. We are not talking about Noah's Ark, or the Ark of the Covenant or any other of "Wyatt's" alleged discoveries, they don't prove anything for the exodus or Sea Passage or Sinai. And the only thing that matters is details matches evidences, not claims about a person's reputation/etc. Besides which Wyatt was not wrong/lying about everything because some things like his Joseph in the 3rd dynasty are able to be somewhat proven (I have more or less proven his Joseph placement in some articles). Moreover, the claims that some of them are fake or wrong/bogus are also disputable. Eg the claims that the Durupinar "Ark" nearby Dogubayzit is only a geological rock formation are not necessarily so definitely true as asserted. There are also other people involved in the Aqaba & Sinai claims other than just "Wyatt", including Josephus, Rene Norbergen, Ross Patterson, Bob Cornuke, plus related evidences of Velikovsky, etc.

2. I never posted any "flawed research" or "opinions". I posted details from bible and apparent matches in the area and history.

3. To repeat. 'Exodus' says numerous times they had "left Egypt" before the sea crossing. So that rules out the Suez or Bitter Lakes / Suez Canal area as the crossing place. Also the "Sinai" Peninsula is too small for 600000 + Israelites for 40 years. Exodus also says they went not by way of the Philistines. So that rules out the Mediterranean (which was never called Yam suph in bible anyway). It says they later turned back/aside (not as far as Egypt) and ended up entrapped in the land between sea and ranges and Egyptians. So this can only be on the west side of the Aqaba in the "Sinai" Peninsula.
Chariots parts and bones and pillar(s) have been found in the Aqaba nearby Nuweiba. No other parts have been found anywhere else all around the "Sinai" Peninsula. Despite claims that the parts are planted fakes or are from a shipwreck, there is no totally reliable proof or disproof that the parts are fake (ie the claims don't seem to me to be definite disproof/proof against then). The full version of the name 'Nuweiba Muza...' means something like "waters of Moses". The Aqaba is also called Yam Suph (usually translated "Red Sea" or "Reed Sea") in Kings in the bible. Josephus' account seems to match the Wadi Watir area. Yam Suph may have nothing to do with "reeds" (suph), it might mean something like "sea of the storm" or "sea of the end".
Remains have also been found in the Jebel/Mount Lawz or Maqla area that match some things at Sinai/Horeb in the bible.
Bible also says Sinai/Horeb was in Arabia. But this is not much help because Arabia is not just modern Saudi Arabia. In Roman times there were Arabia Petraea (roughly "Sinai" Peninsula, Jordan/Edom, Midian/nw Saudi Arabia), Arabia Deserta (roughly Saudi Arabia), and Arabia Felix (roughly Yemen/Aden/Hadhramaut/Himyar). But Midian is certainly in north-west Saudi Arabia. It is even marked as "Midyan" in my Collins Atlas. Burton's book on Midian also has Midian in the same area.

4. Goshen/Rameses is not Avaris, and probably not the northeast Nile Delta of Lower/North Egypt either. Goshen was "near to Joseph". The baby Moses was put in the Nile river and found by princess. There was no royal capital in the delta until the 14th dynasty. The n.e. delta is too close to Succoth and the Egyptian border re the exodus route. The 19th dynasty Pi-ramses is too late for Joseph & Moses, and the bible has no Pi- prefix. Pithom has other better candidate matches in the 12th dynasty and in Middle Egypt than the 19th dynasty one in the n.e. delta. Bible says Hebrews filled the land. Goshen was the best of the land, which might not fit the northeast delta. 'Eretz Goshen' "land of Goshen" is more likely to be Er-ges-her/Giza, or Agouza, near Cairo. Though it is possible that Goshen was the Delta (not just north-east delta) like Wyatt thought, since best of the land might match fertile delta.

5. AIG are not all-right all-good gods. Just because they denounce Wyatt doesn't mean they are right or truthful. Their denouncing of Wyatt might be for ingenuine or incorrect reasons. Besides which one has to cite & debate specific details evidences reasons why they disagree, not just say general vague unspecific claims. Anyway if one wants to argue by credentials and criticisms then AIG is denouced by geologist Lorence Collins.

6. Supposedly superior "experts" have not found or proven the exodus or Sea Crossing chariots (or Noah's Ark or Ark of the Covenant) etc. They even say they can "find no or little evidence for Joseph and Moses/exodus in Egyptian history" (in the dynasties and areas that they suppose they were in). So before you denounce someone like Wyatt as "non-expert" and worship others as "experts" just remember that the experts haven't proven much themselves. Many times in AD history revolutionary discoveries were made by some individual which proved all the previous reigning "experts" theories were wrong, but everyone forgets and continues to worship experts as all right gods and denounce other "non-experts" are all-wrong bad dogs. In the case of Moses and exodus in Egyptian history plenty of alternative scholars agree that the reason experts haven't found them is because the "experts" are wrong (or lying) about which dynasty and area they were in. So experts can be wrong or lying. Sure we have to have a certain amount of respect for modern expert methods and science etc, but they are not infallible gods. I have seen no reliable definite proofs that the chariots parts and bones and pillar(s) in the Aqaba are fakes, rather I see the biblical and historical/geographical evidence seems to support them. To me the only most compelling evidence against the Nuweiba crossing is the difficult terrain re 600000 Hebrews and 600 chariots travelling across the upper middle "Sinai" and through the Wadi Watir, but I can't dimiss all the other evidences that seem to support it.

It's awfully hard for people to admit they've been conned.

 

[SuperCow]

Re last replies on previous page.

4. Goshen/Rameses is not Avaris, and probably not the northeast Nile Delta of Lower/North Egypt either. Goshen was "near to Joseph". The baby Moses was put in the Nile river and found by princess. There was no royal capital in the delta until the 14th dynasty. The n.e. delta is too close to Succoth and the Egyptian border re the exodus route. The 19th dynasty Pi-ramses is too late for Joseph & Moses, and the bible has no Pi- prefix. Pithom has other better candidate matches in the 12th dynasty and in Middle Egypt than the 19th dynasty one in the n.e. delta. Bible says Hebrews filled the land. Goshen was the best of the land, which might not fit the northeast delta. 'Eretz Goshen' "land of Goshen" is more likely to be Er-ges-her/Giza, or Agouza, near Cairo. Though it is possible that Goshen was the Delta (not just north-east delta) like Wyatt thought, since best of the land might match fertile delta.

I agree with most of your post except for the quoted section.

According to most secular sources, Memphis was the capital city of dynasties 3, 4, 6, 7, & 8. Memphis is close to modern day Cairo. Avaris is at Tell el-Daba, and according to Google, is a 28 hour walk (3 day walk or half day by camel or horse). A little farther away is Itjtawy & Herakleopolis, capitals of the 12th/13th dynasty and the 9th/10th dynasty respectively, but also close to the delta region. So we have dynasties immediately before the first intermediate period and the second intermediate period that were close enough to Avaris to travel between in a few days. The circumstances of the destruction from the plagues means that it is very likely that they preceded a dark period for Egypt notwithstanding that The Egyptians had no presence in Israel (according to Judges) for 300 years afterwards.

It doesn't say in Exodus how long it took Moses to travel from Pharaoh to where the Israelites were residing, or for that matter how long the plagues dragged on for.

The Egyptians wouldn't want the Hebrews in the capital, especially if they were worried about them instigating a rebellion due to their growing numbers, so wherever they were, it would be in some separate suburb or town where they would be easy to control.

Most maps online put Succoth at the northern tip of the Gulf of Suez. This would also be two or three days travel from the Avaris site, so it is not too close. It is also in the correct direction to the Nuweiba crossing site being proposed earlier.