Click Here For Christian Media's First Video Channel

Christian Media

Communiqué

ESCAPE FROM PLANET EGYPT

Part IV

In Part III of Escape From Planet Egypt, we recounted the episode in which Moses led the Israelites to the shores of the Red Sea, even as the Egyptian army pursued them. The vast number of former slaves descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were boxed in as the LORD had specifically directed Moses concerning what route to take.

"And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they turn and encamp before Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over against Baal-zephon" (Exodus 14:2).

These developments are enormously important on several levels. At that point in the Exodus, the Egyptians had changed their mind concerning letting the slaves go, and the Pharaoh, accompanied by 600 chariots, was furiously pursuing the fleeing mass. Moreover, God had intentionally steered Israel into a place where there was no escape with a mountain on one side, the Red Sea before them, and the Egyptians behind them.

At that point, Egypt had been devastated by the LORD's plagues, and it is evident the Pharaoh's militia was not pursuing the Israelites with the goal of simply returning the slaves to their servitude. At this stage, it is clear the enraged men of war intended to slaughter them. In other words, by intentionally maneuvering them into a corner, the LORD had put them in the position where He was their only option to survive.

It is also self evident that Israelites themselves feared for their very lives at this time, as the text indicates they angrily lashed out at Moses because they perceived they were about to be killed by the hostile Egyptians.

"And they said unto Moses…it had been better for us to serve the Egyptians, than that we should die in the wilderness" (Exodus 14:12).

This cycle of activity prefigures the New Testament process of election, where God foreordains those He has chosen to respond to His Spirit. To put it another way, by instructing Israel to take the route He specified, the LORD knew the Egyptians were going to overtake Israel at the shore of the Red Sea, which would put His chosen into the position where they would be compelled to cry out to be rescued.

This clearly anticipates the New Testament doctrine of election, where the Scriptures refer to the saved as being elected to respond to His Spiritual calling.

"Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ" (I Peter 1:2).

Unfortunately, believers tend to argue Predestination versus Free Will – which is a useless exercise – as we have no way of knowing before the fact whether or not God has foreordained an individual to respond to His call.

The same holds true for those who choose to reject the wonderful plan of salvation offered to all people – both Jew and Gentile – as the Scriptures plainly show God has an everlasting enmity towards certain identities which are mentioned in Scripture.

The idea that God has an eternal animosity towards a certain segment of His creation is a very important facet of doctrine, as it sheds light on the nature of God, and His dealings with the nations. For instance, in the prophets, the LORD flatly states that He has hostility towards Esau, and the many verses that address this antagonism indicate that it is eternal:

"I have loved [Jacob], saith the Lord…And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness" (Malachi 1:2, 3).

As most Bible students know, Esau is the son of Isaac who dishonoured his birthright as the firstborn, and traded his Spiritual heritage for physical comfort. Esau is later known as Edom, and his descendants, known as the Edomites, will follow his tragic path.

Because of the many variations in the tribal and national names seen in the Scriptures, it is frequently difficult to make the connection between them, and this is particularly true when the name used is actually describing a Spiritual lineage lurking behind a physical bloodline.

Christians are sometimes taken aback the first time they read some of the verses which speak of the LORD's vow to erase the memory that a person named Amalek ever existed at all.

"The Lord hath sworn that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation…for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven" (Exodus 17:16, 14).

However, as pointed out in Part III of the present work, when we review the genealogies in the Old Testament, and learn that Amalek was the grandson of Esau (whom the LORD "hated"), the picture begins to come into focus.

Further, when we see that after Israel crossed the Red Sea into Arabia, and entered in to the Wilderness of Sin, the Israelites were viciously attacked by the Amalekites. Thus, the identity of Amalek, as distinctly connected to Esau/Edom, is consistent with the Scriptural thread of an opponent of God.

Those versed in the basic framework of history are likely aware of an important historical footnote, as Egyptian records tell of a particularly unsavory dynasty among the Pharaohs, and this group was known as the Hyksos.

The term Hyksos means Shepherd-Kings, and the Hyksos dynasty of kings of Egypt was recorded as excessively cruel. The historian Josephus, citing earlier sources, recorded the following.

"[They] savagely burned the cities, razed the tample of the gods to the ground, and treated the whole native population with the utmost cruelty" (Against Apion, Flavius Josephus).

While the Ipuwer Papyrus (which recorded the Biblical plagues which fell on Egypt), also tells of "invaders" who "tormented" Egypt during this period, Velikovsky's Ages In Chaos notes the identification of the Hyksos dynasty was also referred to by the Egyptians as the Amu.

"In the remains of Egyptian literature the Hyksos are call Amu" (Ages in Chaos, Velikovky, page 78, emphasis mine).

The scant records from Egypt indicate the Amu/Hyksos were known to mutilate survivors of clashes with their enemies. They cut off limbs, and tortured their enemies. They were sadistic, to the degree that the Egyptians consider this period one of the most hideous phases of their history.

Ipuwer says the Amu came from the direction of Asia, and since the Exodus informs us that Israel moved Eastward towards Asia as they escaped from the Egyptian captivity (and the Amu/Hyksos were numerous enough to subdue Egypt in the wake of the Red Sea destruction of Pharaoh), the two forces should have met.

In other words, using the reconstructed revisionist timeline, the Egyptian sequence again converges with the Biblical, as the Exodus account clearly identifies the Hyksos/Amu:

"And all the congregation of the children of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin…Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel" (Exodus 17:1, 8).

The Scriptures name Agag as an early king of the Amalekites. In the book of Numbers, when Israel was just beginning to enter Canaan (and Joshua was fighting with the various tribes), Balak, the king of the Moabites hired Balaam the prophet to curse the invading Israelites. Instead of casting a spell on Israel, the famous prophet instead prophesied that Israel was to become a glorious people.

"His seed shall be in many waters, and his king shall be higher than Agag, and his kingdom shall be exalted" (Numbers 24:7).

This reference indicates the Amalekite king Agag was of a far greater stature than is usually thought. However, as we've shown the Amalekites were actually the dynastic line of the Hyksos Pharaohs, the verse now makes sense.

Further, centuries later, the last king of the Amalekites, as recorded in the Bible, was also named Agag. This suggests the 2^nd Agag was Agag II. Over in the Egyptian records, we frequently find the name Apop mentioned as an early Hykso ruler. Many years later, as the Hyksos were finally overthrown from Egypt, their last king was also named Apop – making him Apop II.

This indicates that Apop I and Apop II of the Hyksos records, are Agag I and Agag II of the Scriptures.

In an Egyptian inscription called the Canarvon Tablets, we learn the overthrow of the Amu/Hyksos by an Egyptian royal named Ahmose occurred because they were assisted by an unnamed foreign ally, and this military power is the one which actually took the Amu capital Auaris (Avaris in the inscription).

"The name of the [foreign] king who destroyed the Hyksos is missing" (Ages in Chaos, page 97).

The Canarvon Tablets also tell us that in the war finally ridding Egypt from the treacherous rule of the Amu/Hyksos, while the anonymous ally took the Hyksos capital of Auaris, the Egyptians themselves took the city of Sharuhen.

Centuries later, we see the Spirit of Confusion mystically associated with Egypt continued to be active in this period as well, as the Egyptian historian Manetho mistakenly confused Sharuhen with Jerusalem, and he erroneously indicated the Hyksos founded the city. This led subsequent accounts to compound the error, and identify the Hyksos as the Israelites, instead of the Amalekites.

The Holy Bible tells us it was the LORD Himself who told Saul, Israel's first king, to completely destroy the Amalekites.

"And Saul smote the Amalekites…And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword" (I Samuel 15:8).

This means the unnamed foreign ally of the Egypt inscriptions who fought the Hyksos/Amu, was actually King Saul of Israel.

-- James Lloyd

To Be Continued