Thursday, December 14, 2017

Stephen implied Moses was born near the Winter Solstice

Acts 7:20-21
In which time Moses was born, and was exceeding fair, and nourished up in his father's house three months: And when he was cast out, Pharaoh's daughter took him up, and nourished him for her own son.
Which agrees with Exodus 2:2 (and Hebrews 11, this period of time being three months is said three times in Scripture).  Three months separated the Birth of Moses from him being taken in by Pharaoh's Daughter.

But Stephen goes on to evenly divide the rest of Moses life into three periods of 40 years.  40 years in the house of Pharaoh king of Mizraim, 40 years in the house of Jethro, and then the 40 years of the Wilderness Wandering.

The Forty years of the Wilderness Wandering began in Nisan, the Nisan of the First Passover, and ended in a Nisan, the Passover recorded early in the Book of Joshua.  It seems reasonable then to infer all three 40 year periods begin and end in mid-Nisan.

Just looking at the account of Pharaoh's Daughter finding Moses in Exodus 2, there are good reasons to suspect this is happening near the Spring Equinox.

So if Moses was born three months before events that happen near the Spring Equinox, then he was born near the Winter Solstice.

Likewise, three months means he was taken in by Pharaoh's Daughter at about the anniversary of his Conception. 

Saturday, December 9, 2017

Why does the Tense change in Revelation 11?

I've noticed a few things interesting about Revelation 11.

First, because we often study the different subjects of Revelation in a compartmentalized fashion, we often think in verse 3 the "I will give power unto my two witnesses" is God/Jesus talking.  And maybe it is, but that depends on how you interpret other parts of Revelation.

In the first verse of chapter 11 John writes "and the angel stood, saying" and most of the rest of the chapter is John writing what this angel says.  What Angel is it?  Well remember there were no chapter divisions originally, if you read through 10 and 11 uninterrupted, it becomes clear the angel in question is the angel who was the subject of chapter 10.

I also wonder about the "God of the Earth" the Two Witnesses stand before.  Is it a God they're severing or a God they are opposing?  "Stand Before" could be used both ways.  This title is used no where else in the New Testament, but Satan being the Archon of the Kosmos and God of this Aion leaves open the possibility that this title would most likely be used of Satan.  However it is used of YHWH in Genesis 24:3.   Is it a title of this Angel, who's feet are in the Earth and in the Sea?  It is also worth noting that we are before Satan is cast out of Heaven.

This Blog is predicated on my belief that Revelation should be interpreted chronologically.  But since I now notice much of chapter 11 is a character in the narrative describing future events, I am forced to wonder if there is some wiggle room here, and maybe somethings I have long viewed as being before the Last Trumpet sounds could be after.

And that leads me to the question that was the title of this post.  For verses 1-10 this Angel is speaking in the future tense, in the KJV at least.  Then in verse 11 it changes to past tense.  Maybe it's only in translations it seems this way.  I wouldn't be able to know.

It shouldn't be that big a mystery since lots of Prophecies are spoken in the past tense, and I've made a point of that in posts before.  The sudden change in tense is what seemed interesting here, as I was rereading Revelation 11 in the context of the observations I mentioned above.

In verse 14 it's no longer the Angel speaking, it's John setting the stage for the next Woe to happen, which is the Seventh Trumpet.

Monday, December 4, 2017

Ephraim Ben Joseph is the Horse-Rider of Jacob's Prophecy about Dan

Genesis 49:16-17
Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel.
Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward.
This passage is frequently the beginning of attempts to say The Antichrist will come from Dan, along with a reference to Dan in Jeremiah that also mentions Horses.  But who/what are this Horse and it's Rider?

 It is commonly speculated that the reason Dan and Ephraim are left out of the 144,000 in Revelation 7 is how it was through them that Idolatry entered Israel, in Judges 17-18 and then with Jeroboam, an Ephraimite who built Golden Calves at Dan and Bethel in Ephraim.

It is often assumed that the difference with Ephraim is Ephraim is still represented by the name of Joseph, since Manasseh is named separately Joseph here must be only Ephraim.  But Numbers 13 doesn't remind us of Joseph when it identifies Ephraim's Spy, but calls it's Manasseh spy of Joseph.  Manasseh himself as the Firstborn kind of split in two, the two sides of the Jordan, called Machir and Gilead in the Song of Deborah, and this is needed to justify Jeroboam getting Ten Tribes, attempts to justify saying he also got Simeon will not hold up.  Maybe the two tribes left out of the Sealing are involved with The Mark, Satan's counterfeit of the Seal?

Now, both that Judges narrative and the Jeroboam situation may make you think Ephraim lead the way and Dan followed.  But Ephaim's major spiritual problems don't start till Judges 17, while a Danite has an issue in Leviticus 24.  But I also think that the mother of Micah in Judges 17 was Delilah, and that Delilah was not a philistine.

Jacob's blessing on Joseph in Genesis 49 says he has a Bow and depicted him as an Archer, Zechariah 9 also depicted Ephraim as an Archer.  Isaiah 28 says Ephraim has a Crown.  Isaiah 63 represents Israel as a Horse.  The rider on the White Horse in Revelation 6 has a Bow and a Crown, and is often speculated to possibly be The Antichrist.

It is interesting to note that Jehu wielded a Bow and Arrow when he overthrew Jehoram.   Jehu is someone a Messiah Ben-Joseph claimant may seek to model themselves after.

Maybe the False Prophet is from Dan and The Antichrist from Ephraim?  When I look at the Prophetic model lots of Rabbinic Jews are expecting, it's easy to see Messiah Ben-Joseph who is Mortally Wounded by Armilus as the Beast, and the False Prophet as Messiah Ben-David who resurrects him.  There is also a view proposed in Rabbinic writings that Messiah Ben-David's mother will be from Dan. 

I feel like I've made a solid case already, for those who believe in Mazzaroth/Gospel in The Stars theories, I have one more factor to add.

The most popular constellations to identify Joseph/Ephraim with are Aquarius and Taurus (and if Manasseh needs a separate one it's one right next to one of those).  I see no Biblical basis for Aquarius.  Taurus is justifiable by Joseph's blessing in Deuteronomy 33, called a Cow and an Aurochus (Re'em translated Unicorn in the KJV), but in that context Judah is no longer Leo but either Gad or Dan.

In Genesis 49 Joseph is an Archer, the Archer constellation is Sagittarius, who is also a Horseman and has a Crown, the Corona Australis.  People looking for astronomical references in Revelation tend to see the White Horseman as Sagittarius for these reasons.  And Sagittarius is right next to Scorpio, which gets identified with Dan based on Genesis 49.

Sunday, December 3, 2017

The Crucifixion at the site of Solomon's Temple?


Christians have long wanted to view Genesis 22:14 as saying the place where Isaac was offered is the same spot as where Jesus was Crucified.  The problem has been Mt Moriah being clearly identified as where Solomon's Temple was (The name Moriah appears in The Bible only twice, Genesis 22:2 and 2 Chronicles 3:1), and we know Jesus wasn't Crucified inside The Temple.

The Garden Tomb theory is based in part on saying that location is also on the same mountain as the Temple Mount, and was originally it's peak.  But the Garden Tomb in question is too old, and I have long felt that location for The Crucifixion was least likely to be true.

However now that I've opened the door to the possibility that the Second Temple wasn't where the First Temple was.  Where was Solomon’s Temple site in the time of Christ?  Could it be where the Passover was fulfilled in 30 AD?

What if Jesus was Crucified where Animals would have been killed in Solomon's Temple?   And maybe the Tomb where he was buried and rose from the dead was beneath the Holy Place or Holy of Holies, his Body laid beneath where The Ark once rested?

Now needless to say if this is true it rules out the Mount of Olives model that I had favored at one point, since that's to the East and probably where Solomon placed his Idols.

Placing Solomon's Temple to the West would happen to fit The Church of The Holy Sepulcher.  In my post about Venus maybe being the Star of Bethlehem, I was interested in the implications of Hadrian building a Temple to Venus on that site.  In the apocryphal Prophecy attributed to the Tiburtine Sybil, The Church of the Holy Sepulcher seems to play the role modern Futurist Christians tend to give The Temple in Bible Prophecy.  The actual presumed Tomb of Jesus there is directly under its largest Dome, which is interesting.  

That would place the Brazen Altar in the Katholikon, perhaps about where the Omphalos is.  I recall seeing in a documentary I watched years ago, a woman saying she thinks the Crucifixion site was within The Church of the Holy Sepulcher, but not at the traditional spot.  This part I may be remembering wrong, but I think she placed it in the Katholikon.

However I have seen models of the Tabernacle and Temple that interpret the Brazen Altar as being as being not directly east of the entrance to the Holy Place, but a little further south.

But I'm not quite willing to support The Church of The Holy Sepulcher being the site of either  Solomon's Temple or Calvary just yet.  It may be too far West (and North) given where I think Jebus proper was.

What if the real site of Jesus Crucifixion and Resurrection was where the Nea Ekklesia was built?  Which in my main post on thinking Solomon’s Temple wasn’t where the second Temple was I came to favor for it’s location.

The Garden that exists by that site now happens to by sheer coincidence be called The Garden of The Resurrection, the intent being to refer to Israel's modern Resurrection as a nation.  And that Armenian Church is called The Church of the Archangels, I have suggested before that Michael's actions in Daniel 12 could be tied to the events of the Crucifixion and Resurrection.

Some people have theorized Jesus was Crucified on a still standing Tree, with only part of the Cross being what he carried.  Which makes me curious about the Olive Tree believed to mark the Holy of Holies in that model.

However I have come to realize that if that Armenian Church is where Ananias lived as it’s actual tradition claims, then it was within the City at Christ’s time and thus not where the Crucifixion would have been.  

The people who before me argued it was the site of The Temple were basing most of their arguments on it being the Second Temple.

One more compelling argument for the possibility of Jesus burial being where the Holy of Holies was, where the Ark of The Covenant rested,  is in the word for Ark itself.

The Hebrew word translated Ark when referring to the Ark of the Covenant is not the same Hebrew word used for Noah’s Ark or the basket the carried Moses.  It’s ‘arown Strong Number 727.  This word is used almost exclusively in direct reference to the Ark of the Covenant, including I think every time the KJV translates it Ark.  Of course I lean towards the theory that there were two Ark of the Covenants and this word is used of both.  But still it’s almost always of an Ark containing Tablets of The Law.

Six of the exceptions to this are places where the KJV translated it “chest”, in two accounts of the same events.  2 Kings 12:9-10 and 2 Chronicles 24:8-11.  This chest was also placed in The Temple, it was a chest for depositing funds for The Temple.

Coincidentally the name given to Ornan who originally owned the Threshing Floor the Temple was built on in 2 Samuel 24 is Araunah, basically this word with a Heh added at the end.  Interesting but still not the exact same word, but the most similar any other word in Scripture is.

But the exact word in question does appear one other time in Scripture, in the very last verse of the Book of Genesis.  Where the KJV translates it “coffin” because it describes where Joseph’s body was laid to rest.  Joseph is viewed as a type of Christ, and the Tomb Jesus was buried in was originally built for another man named Joseph.

The references to Jacob and Joseph being “embalmed” in Genesis 50:2-3 and 26 are often assumed to refer to Mummification because of who/where people assume Mizraim was.  But the actual etymology of the word just means to spice or anoint a body, exactly as was done with Jesus.

So perhaps the last verse of the first book of The Bible is providing us a type picture of the Burial of Jesus while at the same time providing the first usage in Scripture of a word used almost exclusively of The Ark of The Covenant?

Saturday, December 2, 2017

12 BC Date for the Nativity

I’ve been slightly off in the past when I mention saying that a Romans census took about 5 years.  I just went by the usual known Census dates and assumes they dated the start of that 5 year period, allowing the 8 BC Census to end in 4 or 3 BC.

In actuality the Monumentum Ancyranum inscription states that Augustus completed a Lustrum in 8 BC, the year Censorinus and Asinius were Consuls.  That would make the first year of that Lustrum 12 BC.  Some translations word this more vaguely, but I think the version identifying 8 BC as when it was completed may be correct.

Now I’ve made a big deal before about my post deconstructing the assumption that Luke mentions Quirinus.  But 12 BC was the year Quirinus was Consul.  Again Luke 2 doesn’t use a word for Governor, but for governing.  The Legate of Syria at this time was Marcus Titius, but he was brand new in the office, it’s not difficult at all to imagine one of the Consuls overseeing the East.  Especially since 12 BC was also the year Quirins started his campaign against the Homonadenses.

Some before have argued for a 12 BC Birthdate for Jesus.  They get a lot of stuff wrong (including the common anti December 25th memes), starting with wanting to see Halley's Comet as the Star of Bethlehem.  Since I place the Star of Bethlehem a little under 2 years before Jesus was born, not at his birth.  My model here would use the Star of Bethlehem date favored by 15 or 14 BC theorists, when there were more Jupiter-Regulus conjunctions, and some interesting movements with Venus.

There could be more time between the family going to Egypt and Herod’s death then people usually assume.  The word for “young child” used at the time they return to Egypt, can simply mean not fully an adult yet.  Mark 5:40-42 uses it of a 12 year old.

Now that goes against some of what I’ve argued before.  I do still believe the Magi arrived in Jerusalem when Jesus was born.  But it might be Herod didn’t give up on waiting for the Magi to return till after the 40 days.  Maybe he wasn’t in Jerusalem when Simeon and Anna gave their prophecies.

In my post on the Lunar Eclipse preceding the Death of Herod, where I explain why reluctantly I may have to agree with the 4 BC Eclipse.  I also Broke down Luke 2 and showed that it was only John preaching against Antipas and Herodias dated to the 14th year of Tiberius, Jesus Baptism when he was almost 30 could have been earlier.

If Jesus was conceived during the Passover season of 13 BC, and then born in late December 13 BC or early January 12 BC.  Then Nissan of 37 AD would be the 49th anniversary of Jesus conception, a Jubilee.  And that’s the when I believe the 70 Weeks of Daniel 9 ended.

I believe Simeon the second Bishop of Jerusalem was the same person as Simon the half brother of Jesus (in-spite of the early Catholics wanting to call him a son of Clopas).  I believe all of his half siblings were younger, since I believe Mary was their mother and Jesus was obviously her first born.  Simeon’s death is dated to 117 AD, and he was apparently 120 years old when he died, according to Eusebius.  That would place the birth of Simon in 5 or 4 BC.  Assuming they were named in the order they were born, James and Joses were also older than Simon.  So that is potential evidence against my past desire to place Jesus Birth right before Herod died.

However that date for Simeon’s death may be too late.  Since it’s said to be while Tiberius Claudius Atticus Herodes was Governor of Judea, which was from 99-102.  

This is an idea I’m considering, but now one I’m willing to consider my main theory yet.

Friday, December 1, 2017

When I say I think Jesus was born on December 25th

I don't necessarily mean that exactly.  But I think the basic time-frame is right.  Late December or early January.  On the Hebrew Calendar in either Kislev or Tevet. 

I have a bit of a hunch it may have been the 25th day of the Month on the Hebrew Calendar, and then that got translated to December 25th by Gentile Christians.   In other words I think it highly possibly Jesus was born on the First day of Hanukkah and Circumcised on the Eight Day of Hanukkah.

I still haven't made up my mind what year yet.  That's something I'll be getting into more in the future.

Thursday, November 30, 2017

Israel did wander in the Sinai Peninsula

I've spent a long time invested in argument that the wandering in the wilderness was entirely in "Arabia" east of the Gulf of Aqaba.

First supporting Jabal El Lawz as Sinai, then the Petra Sinai location.  I did a post on my Revised Chronology blog responding to certain critics of that view.  Reading and writing off their arguments about how ancient usage of "Arabia" included west of the Gulf of Aqaba, and verses saying Sinai wasn't in Jethro's homeland.  That was made as the time I was switching from Lawz to Petra.

Later I argued for Kadesh-Barneas being Mecca and Sinai being Sana'a in Yemen.  Then I considered Mecca being Sinai.  Then become convinced of arguments for Petra being Kadesh.  Then recently argued for Sinai being in southern Iraq or Kuwait.  And through most of this I supported Mont Hor where Aaron died being the mountain near Petra that local tradition identifies it with.

But I was reading Numbers 21 today, and noticed a vital smoking gun.  Maybe the critics of Sinai in Arabia I'd read before had mentioned this passage and it just slipped by me. First Israel fights a brief war with King Arad in the Negev (South is a misleading translation).  Then in verse 4.
 And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way to the Red Sea, to compass the land of Edom: and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way.
 And then they went on to travel to Moab.

Edom was south of the Dead Sea and north of the Gulf of Aqaba/Red Sea/Yam Suf, on a modern map straddling the border between Israel and Jordan but it's most key capitals were on Jordan's side.  The Negev desert is to it's west and Moab to it's north-east.

This verse clearly and unambiguously places Mount Hor west of the Gulf of Aqaba.  So years of fringe theorizing of mine are dead.  Still there is more then one Sinai view just on the Peninsula.  There is no Biblical Basis for saying it has to be the tallest mountain, that comes from Josephus.

However, I have become very open to the hypothesis that Mizraim in The Torah was not in Africa but in Arabia.  In that post I'd briefly considered that I could still support the Wyatt-Cornuke Read Seas Crossing site just going the other way, but wrote it off because when I made that I'd just posted the Sinai in Iraq theory.  Now however, this discovery when ruining old theories of mine has filled the one hole that the Mizraim in Arabia hypothesis had.

Now technically this passage I just noticed directly only confirms a Sinai Peninsula based location for Mount Hor.  But it's difficult to make sense of going west to Hor just to turn back around again.

I still think it's possible there are two Kadeshes.  Barnea is never used as a border marker.  Numbers 20 says they just arrived at that Kadesh, it's from there they sent messengers to Edom.  The second Kadesh, Meribah-Kadesh, probably has a Sinai Peninsula based location also.

It is Kadesh-Barnea that is 11 days from Horeb/Sinai.   38 years separated the arrival at Kadesh-Barnea in Numbers 13 and the passing of the Brook Zered in Numbers 21:12 and Deuteronomy 2:13-14.  So the people arguing they spent 38 years at just one Kadesh are wrong.

Numbers 33 does seem to list only one Kadesh.  But the number of sites they camped at between Sinai and the Kadesh ins Zin (which is Meribah-Kadesh) are way to many to fit an only 11 day Journey.  In Numbers 12 and 13 it seems like they went right from Hazeroth to Paran and Kadesh-Barnea.

So either they mostly camped at two places per day, or Kadesh-Barnea should be identified with Rithmah or between Hazeroth and Rithmah.  Numbers 10 tells us it took them 3 days from leaving Sinai to find their first resting place.

The Wilderness of Zin is mentioned in Numbers 13:21, but that's after the spied have left that Kadesh to spy out the land.

And now I can't help but feel like I'm making another tortured argument.  At the end of the day the only problem the people viewing both Kadeshes as the same have is the wording of Numbers 20:1, and that could only read that way cause of the English.  Numbers 15-19 describe no traveling.

I have a lot to work out still.

But, perhaps it is really only Hor this passages place west of Aqaba.  Because in Numbers 14, at Kadesh-Barneas after they rejected the land and Yahuah sentenced them to wonder 40 years.  He tells them to go to the wilderness "by way of the Red Sea".  So that seems like Evidence that Kadesh-Barnea and Hor are not on the same side of the Gulf of Aqaba.

And once again, even Pre-Isalmic sources like Jerome place Paran in Arabia Deserta, a specific Romans term not applicable to the widest possibly definition of Arabia, it refers to the massive Desert between Petra and Arabia Felix (Yemen).
 Both Eusebius (in his Onomasticon, a Bible dictionary) and Jerome reported that Paran was a city in Paran desert, in Arabia Deserta (beyond Arabia Nabataea), southeast of Eilat Pharan. Onomasticon, under Pharan, states: "(Now) a city beyond Arabia adjoining the desert of the Saracens [who wander in the desert] through which the children of Israel went moving (camp) from Sinai. Located (we say) beyond Arabia on the south, three days journey to the east of Aila (in the desert Pharan) where Scripture affirms Ismael dwelled, whence the Ishmaelites. It is said (we read) also that (king) Chodollagomor cut to pieces those in 'Pharan which is in the desert'."[3]
Sebeos, the Armenian Bishop and historian, describing the Arab conquest of his time, wrote that the Arabs "assembled and came out from Paran".[4][5]
So perhaps this doesn't change my other views as much as I at first thought.  And the Teman of Habakkuk is probably Tihamah.

But it puts me back to square one as far as a Red Sea crossing with Mizraim in Arabia does.

I just read an article saying Joktan never went to Arabia

http://www.eifiles.cn/oo-en.htm

I've talked about descent from Joktan before.  On my Revised Chronology blog in the Queen of Sheba post, and the post about the Magi coming from Arabia.  And on my SolaScripturaChristianLiberty blog talking about Christianity in Pre-Islamic Arabia and Feminism in Pre-Islamic Arabia.  But this is a good opportunity to put my thoughts on this on record here.

This article first of all ignores that the Tower of Babel incident clearly took place before the events of Genesis 10, it's a prequel, and not the only place where Genesis is not strictly chronological, just look at Genesis 25.  But this site argues Joktan's clan must have broke off and headed East before the others reached Shinar.
Some Bible scholars have offered an opinion that Joktan migrated into Arabia
because two of his sons, Sheba and Havilah, have the same names as two tribes
in Arabia.  But those Arabian tribes are of Cushite descent in the lineage of Ham
and are not in the lineage of Shem at all (see Gen. 10:6-7).  Arabia is part of the
migration route to Africa, the land of Cush; therefore the first peoples in Arabia
were Cushite, in the lineage of Ham. 

(Many Biblical names may occur multiple times in the different genealogies but
that does not confirm a genealogical kinship; only the context can indicate that.)
Now I do agree about there being Cushites in Arabia.  The problem here is they ignore Ophir, there is no Ophir among the descendants of Cush, and Arabain traditions frequently linked Ophir to Sheba and Havilah.  And The Bible does the same.

It is the Sheba descended from Cush who wound up East of the Euphrates, in India, (The name of the Indian deity Shiva no doubt comes from Sheba).  In India there are mountains called the Hindu Kush and there was an ancient Kushan empire.  The Sheba and Dedan from Cush were sons of Ramah.  In Indian mythology there was also a Rama who had two sons, but their names were changed to Kusha and Lava.

The Dedan in Arabia was most certainly the Dedan of Jokshan son of Abraham by Keturah, because we know that Dedan was located firmly within what was promised to Abraham, and is fairly consistent with where Josephus says the sons by Keturah were settled.  The Abrahamic Sheba is the one I'm most uncertain where to place.

The Cushite Havilah is probably in the Near East but further north, the one that helps us identify Eden.

Many of the Arabian tribes descended from Joktan are known as Qahtanite tribes.  Mount Shepher is mount Zafar in Yemen.  The Yemeni Hadramaut kingdom descended from Joktan's son Hazarmaveth.

Joktan had 13 sons.  So I'm fine with arguing they aren't limited to Arabia, that some went to Africa via Havilah.  And some may have become Native Americans, giving Joktan's name to the Yucatan peninsula.

Many Mormon scholars have a theory that the Jared who founded the Book of Mormon's Jaredites is the same as Jerah son of Joktan.  I think that could be what Smith intended given how he played with Biblical names.  The unnamed brother was probably meant to be the firstborn Almodad since he seems to be depicted as having Firstborn authority.

I don't believe the Book of Mormon however.  What I do believe is Native Americans came here via Asia and Alaska.  I also believe the deported northern Israelites contributed a great deal to the populations of Asia east of the Euphrates and the Native Americans.

So as far as this article's desire to make a point out of how massive the populations of the far east are.  Rebecca was told she'd be an ancestor of Thousands of Millions (that's Billions), Reuben was told in Deuteronomy 33 that his men would not be few.  And Ephraim was told he would become the fullness of the nations.

The Pre-Babel language was obviously Hebrew.

Monday, November 27, 2017

More speculation on The Little Horn

This Daniel 7 speculation could be made compatible with the Daniel 7 theory I posted a couple days ago.  But it arguably works better in the context of the theory before that.  And should definitely be compared with my last post on The Little Horn.

It derives from one of my earliest Lost Tribes posts.  Where I suggested that the Fourth Beast proper is Edom but the Horns are Ephraim.  That drew on connections between Edom and Ephraim made in Obadiah, and also Amalek being in Mount Ephraim during the Midianite oppression.  And in the context of Daniel 2 that sees the Iron as Edom and the Miry Clay as Ephraim.

Now initially the main reason I had for associating the number 10 with Ephraim was that Jeroboam was given 10 Tribes.  But I've noticed something else compelling.

In Deuteronomy 33 Moses gives Blessings to the Tribes of Israel, like Jacob did in Genesis 49.  Verses 13-17 are the blessing for Joseph, one of the longer ones.  This is one of the foundations of the Messiah Ben-Joseph doctrine taught by Rabbinic Judaism.  Other aspects of this blessing I may talk about in future posts, but here I'm going to focus on a specific part of verse 17.
"his horns are like the horns of Aurochs: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh."
Mostly the numbers here are seen as just about how Ephraim has or will have a larger population then Manasseh.  Genesis 48 says Ephraim would become a multitude of nations (or the fullness of them) while Manasseh would simply be one great people.  But what I notice is this is specifically about the Horns of Joseph.  If each Horn is a "thousands", then Ephraim is 10 and Manasseh is 1, making a total of 11.

In the prior Little Horn post.  One theory I suggested was seeing the Little Horn as The United States of America.  And I have a prior post about America possibly being Manasseh.

But I also talked about seeing it as Modern Greece.  On my Revised Chronology blog, I talked about possible links between ancient Greece and Northern Israelites, I may talk about that more in the future.  That speculation has included specific figures of Greek mythology who might have been based on Jehu, a king who first arose in Gilead.  But also the possibly of the Dorians coming from Dor, a city linked to Manasseh, Asher and Issachar/Zebulun.

As far as the recent theory about the Fourth Beast being Arabia and Islam.  The Little Horn being Jordan fits well, a recently created nation, at the same time as modern Israel.  It includes much of ancient Edom and most of the land of the Trans-Jordan Tribes, in fact the capital of modern Jordan is arguably land given to Gilead in-spite of it's modern name making us think of Ammon.  And Jordan also originally had the West Bank territories, which included Shechem, Samaria and Tirzah. And all Palestinians technically have Jordanian citizenship.

When it comes to Genesis 48, people talk a lot about Ephraim, but I think we might be overlooking Manasseh.

Saturday, November 25, 2017

Another variation of the Seven Heads of Daniel 7 view.

I laid out my view of the Seven Heads of Daniel 7, and then improved it a bit in my Basra post.  This view is predicated on saying seven heads are implied in Daniel 7, 3 beasts with 1 head each and 1 beast with 4 heads.

The most controversial aspect of that was making Rome the seventh head instead of the 6th, defining it as yet future in John's time because it hadn't taken Babylon yet.  And that still may be the best way of looking at Daniel 7.  But I have recently devised a variation that keep the basic premise but returns Rome to being the 6th and then present head.

Basically, it makes Rome not the 4th Beast anymore but the fourth head of the Leopard.  The Leopard and his heads I associate with Javan and his four Sons, and there have long been reasons to justify associating Kittim with Rome.  Rome was very influenced by Greece.  In the Eastern Empire Greek was always the more popular language, and after the western Empire fell the Eastern Empire eventually even flat out made Greek it's official Language.  So Rome as it was to it's Eastern conquests including Judea, was always very Greek.

My initial form of this Daniel 7 view was based on it being Babylon/Shinar's POV of history, for this we return to the focal point being the Land/Erets of Israel.

The Four Heads of the Leopard are thus Alexander, the Ptolemies, the Seleucids and the Caesars.

Naturally, the seventh head must thus become the Islamic Empire.  Chris White bases his objection to Islam as the 7th head mainly on saying you can't possibly define Islam as having a short reign.  However in this theory, that's where the Horns come in.

Just as the Four Horns in Daniel 8 represent a Kingdom being divided.  The 10 Horns/Toes represent Islam being divided.  Initially it was just a split in two, the Sunni/Shia split, hence the Two Legs of the Statue in Daniel 2.  But has since fractured even more.

It was a united Islam that had a comparatively short reign over the Eretz of Israel.  It was the second Caliph who captured Judea, and then the Split was cemented as soon as the fourth died.  All of the first four were people who knew Muhammad, meaning this all happened in the course of one lifetime.

If I'm going to look for a specific individual to identify with the Seventh Head, it would be Ali ibn Abu Talib based on what I've discussed elsewhere.

This does not necessarily prove an Islamic Antichrist view, it makes Islam relevant, but I still feel the Eight King of Revelation 17 is one of the first 5, not the seventh.

How should we define the Fourth Beast in terms of the Table of Nations?  Since we know the first three are Asshur, Madai and Javan?

The thing is Arabia was a very ethnically mixed region.  The word Arab is in the Hebrew texts spelled the same as the Hebrew word for an ethnically mixed person (sometimes translated Mongrel), when Israel is called a "Mixed Multitude" at the Exodus, Mixed is also Arab there.  And it's the same when Daniel 2:41 describes the toes of the Statue as "Iron mixed with Miry Clay".

Arabia had Cushites and possibly also Mizraim from Ham, and also I think some Canaanite presence, particularly the Sinites.  From Shem it had the Joktanites, the tribes of Ishmael the firstborn of Abraham, and also Abraham's sons by Keturah, by the time of Joseph Midianite and Ishmaelite became interchangeable. The Trans-Jordan tribes were often in conflict with Ishmaelites as 1 Chronicles 5 shows.  And I think 1 Chronicles 4 shows Simeon migrated to some Ishmaelite lands, and I think the clan of Jamin specifically went to Yemen and provided Yemen it's name.  My defining Arabia as being not just the whole peninsula but also everything between the Jordan and Euphrates rivers, also puts within it Moab, Ammon, and Edom, including the Amalekites who are linked to both Seir and Kadesh.

Edom is perhaps the most important.  Removing Rome as the Fourth Beast would destroy my support for seeing Edom as Rome, because the foundation of that was largely how the Fourth Beast's unique fate of being completely destroyed with no national identity left in the Messianic Era, is outside Daniel given only to Edom and Amalek, some cities may be described similarly but no other whole nation.  We see this in Balaam's Prophecies and in Obadaiah.  Jeremiah 46-49 also foretells judgment on several nations, but with Edom lacking a promise of restoration.  Isaiah 34 and Ezekiel 35-36 also seem to see Edom as the last Nation to be destroyed before The Messianic Era begins.

And it's possible Edom could be linked to more of Arabia then is traditionally assumed.  Where you place Sinai and Kadesh-Barnea inevitably effects your view of how far Edom's borders stretch, and I've gone back and forth between a few theories that place Sinai at least pretty far away.  And his having a grandson named Teman can justify linking Edom to Yemen.  Genesis 14 links the Amalekites to the same region Ishmael would later settle.

It's also interesting thematically how all the passed over First Born lines from Abraham can be linked to Arabia.  Ishmael's status is the one tied directly to Islamic theology.  But Esau was also originally considered the firstborn of Isaac.  And then the fact that some Tribes of Israel can be linked Arabia, they include Reuben, the firstborn of Jacob, and eastern Manasseh who was the firstborn of Joseph.  Simeon was the second born of Jacob.  Perhaps the Little Horn is an attempt by Satan to create an heir to all these lines?

It also could be viable to in Daniel 2 see the Iron as the peoples of Arabia and the Miry Clay as the Ottomans.

Saturday, November 18, 2017

Biblical Egypt might not be Egypt

Egypt is the name of a modern nation on the north eastern coast of Africa, where the Nile river enters enters the Mediterranean Sea.  We also commonly use that name for the Ancient nation that existed in various forms on that same location for over 2000 years ending around 30 BC.  

And it’s also used in English Bibles to translate the Hebrew Mizraim and the Greek Aegyptos.  Resulting in an assumption that those Biblical names refer to that same ancient nation.  However what that ancient nation called itself was Kemet/Kemt/Khem.

A number of theories have been proposed that say that translation is wrong.  That Mizraim was a nation located somewhere in ancient Arabia, and that the word commonly transliterated “pharaoh” was a personal name.  My first instinct was naturally to oppose that idea.  But the more I’ve thought about it and researched many things, the more plausible I think it is.  I had specifically opposed it in my The Nile in The Bible post, but admittedly my logic behind seeing that alternate Hebrew word for river (or some kind of body of water) as an Egyptian name for The Nile was pretty flawed.

Now lots of people tie this into other weird theories, like saying Israel was actually in Arabia, or pre-exile Israel at least.  I definitely reject that.  Jesus was born in the same Bethlehem as David, and probably Crucified on the same mountain Isaac was offered.  And 12th Dynasty Kemet records place the Anakim in Hebron.

Where in Arabia to look seems to vary, its been placed in Yemen, or north-east of Yemen, others I think place it as a closer neighbor to Israel.  I have a factor to bring up later I don’t think others have noticed.  And one website has specifically called Mizraim an “insignificant village”.

The name Kemet/Khem has been argued to possibly be a form of Ham.  Misraim isn’t the only nation to come from Ham.  But The Bible calls Misraim the “Land of Ham” in a few places, so that is used to say the name Kemet is also Biblical.  However that is flawed logic at best.

The Biblical “River” we assume to be the Nile could be one of many ancient bodies of Water in Arabia long since dried up, like the one some seek to identify with the Pison.

People like to read significance into Mizraim ending with a Dual suffix.  But that same Dual Suffix also ends the name Ephraim.  Ephraim was born in Mizraim to a Mizraimite mother, but it’s more relevant perhaps that Mizraim and Ephraim were both second born sons.

In Genesis 12 Abraham travels through the Land promised to him till he reached the Negev (usually translated South), then Famine brings him to Mizraim.  From this point he could have easily went either south-west to Africa, or south-east to Arabia.  How these lands are today has us thinking the Nile is a far better solution for fleeing a famine.  But there is good reason to believe much of Arabia used to be not as barren as it is now, and perhaps more recently than most think.

While in Mizraim a whole drama unfolds.  This is when Hagar became Sarah’s servant. Then Abraham returned to the promised land via the Negev in chapter 13.   Later when Hagar leaves the house of Abraham after Isaac is born, pretty much everyone agrees she went to what qualified as Arabia, people just sometimes disagree with Muslims on how far south.  And while there, in Arabia, she arranges for Ishmael to marry a Mizraimite wife.  So this is often considered the first clue that Mizraim should be in Arabia if we remove our assumptions.

There is also the fact that there is little evidence Kemet ever practiced Slavery like what’s depicted in Exodus.  Even Kerma’s servitude was more like a serfdom.  Slavery was very common in Arabia however, and as such was perfectly legal under Islam.

In the narratives surrounding the reign of Solomon.  The phraseology “Pharaoh King of Egypt” and “Shishak King of Egypt” are the same, so if one is a personal name so is the other.  And if Shishak is a personal name then it’s significant that it's clearly a Semitic name, with clearly related names elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, so saying it must be Shoshenq is absurd.  Also Shishak is never called Pharaoh.  Even when Pharaoh is compounded with other personal names much later, Necho and Hophra, King is still used separately, so still doesn’t make sense as a synonym for King.  Pharaoh is not a good transliteration of the Hebrew name here either, Par’oh or Par’u would be more accurate.

There are some Pre-Islamic traditions about the tribes of Joktan that are interesting.  Referring to a Firnifs as the first king of Egypt or Mesraye.  But a Pharaoh as a separate King ruling over Saba, Havilah  and Ophir in Yemen.  After him Sheba became a matriarchy for 60 generations.  But in another version Puntos was the first king of Egypt.  And another says Phara’an ruled over Ophir.  So confusion clearly existed here.

Assyrian records refer to a people called Misrim, Misr, Misuri or Misur, sometimes with a ruler called Pir’u.  Attempts to interpret these records as referring to Kemet are difficult.  Even scholars who do think Biblical Misraim is Kemet still find themselves seeing these as separate.  One such example is the battle of Qarqar from the reign of Shalmaneser III, most notable for mentioning Ahab.  The Misr there seem like an awfully minor player to be the powerful Nile empire.  This tribe is often mentioned alongside other Arab kingdoms like Dedan and Kedar.  A couple times listed next to a Samsi queen of Arabia/Kedar.  

And the name Pir’u pops up in Assyrian records totally unrelated to the Misr, showing it’s in general a semitic name.  Par’osh/ParoshPharosh is a Biblical Hebrew name that is similar in its first root/syllable and so appears next to Phar’oh in the Strong's Concordance.  However Paruah is a Hebrew name I think might be closer to being a variant on the same name.

Much speculations has gone on about the Bithiah daughter of Pharaoh mentioned in 1 Chronicles 4 who was a wife of Mered. The Ten Commandments film reflects a tradition identifying her with the adoptive mother of Moses.  But this Pharaoh is not connected to Mizraim or called a King, so maybe he was just an Israelite with that name?

Par’oh could be a name that many kings of Misraim had, like how many kings of Aram were Benhadad.

At a certain point Mizraim definitely becomes the Egypt we usually think of.  In Jeremiah and Ezekiel and at the very end of the 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles narratives, starting in the reign of Josiah.  Because we know Necho and Hophra are the Nekos and Apries of Herodotus.  And later the allusions to Mizraim in Daniel 11 are definitely about the Ptolemaic Dynasty.  Maybe Mizraim could be identified with one of the Hyksos tribes?  But more importantly, this is post Assyria.

I do agree that Tirhakah king of Cush/Ethiopia of 2 Kings 19:9 and Isaiah 39:9 is Taharqa, a ruler of the 25th Dynasty, the Nubian Dynasty.  But the Biblical references to him do not link him directly to Mizraim.  Neither calling him a Mizraimite or saying he was a king of Mizraim.

Other references to Mizraim at this time exist.  Elsewhere in Isaiah, and in the historical narratives of Hezekiah’s reign.  What Assyria did do to Kemet matches what Isaiah (in places like chapter 20) foretold to happen to Mizraim.  But that’s kind of what Assyria did to everyone.  In addition to deporting populations, they resettled in a new population from elsewhere, hence the origins of the Samaritans in II Kings 17.  So perhaps after Assyria deported Kemet, they resettled Mizraimites there who then became the Dynasty conventional chronology calls the 26th.  Herodotus does say Necho’s dynasty has it's origins in governors appointed by Assyria.  Manetho claimed the 26th Dynasty had kings before Necho I (The Biblical Necho is Necho II), but that could be based on their propaganda trying to seem more indigenous than they really were.

Where I’m later going to propose Mizraim might have been (or at least included) isn’t by mainstream scholars included in what Assyria conquered, but there is a lot we don’t know about ancient Arabia, and plenty that’s obscure in the geographical references of Assyrian inscriptions.  Regardless Assyria certainly did conquer some of what qualifies as Arabia including parts of modern Saudi Arabia, as foretold in Isaiah 21, which I’ve talked about before.

The Greek name Aegyptus was applied to Kemet certainly by Herodotus's time.  And was the name of the Roman province in that region (Copt and Coptic also come from Aegyptus by a long process).  The Greek texts of the New Testament use this name a lot, including in Old Testament references that are about Mizraim.  However I think that Greek name may be in exactly the same situation as Mizraim.  In Greek mythology the namesake of Aegyptus was the son of King Belus who ruled the Nile and married it’s daughter, but Belus first gave to Aegyptus a kingdom in Arabia, according to Apollodorus ( 2.1.4-5).  I’d discussed this before speculating them to be Hyksos/Amalekites, but maybe Belus was a Greek memory of Ham and Aegyptus of Misraim.  Dannus was given Libya, making him perhaps Phut.

I believe Homer was a contemporary of Gyges of Lydia.  So even his references to Aegyptus and “Pharan Thebes” are after Assyria began moving people around.  By Herodotus time Aegyptus came to refer to all the Dynasties that ruled Kemet, but it may not have originally.  And so the Septuagint usage of Aegyptus came to confuse people.  And people like Josephus, Philo and the Early Church Fathers were influenced by that confusion.  

Many think the Greek Aegyptus comes from a name of Memphis hwt-ka-ptah.  But that looks like a stretch to me.  Some wanting to make this cycle of myths refer to Biblical Patriarchs say Aegyptus comes from Jacob, I don’t really buy that either.  The etymology of Aegyptus I may return to later.

The New Testament references to then contemporary Aegyptus probably usually refer to the Roman Province of Egypt.  And Alexandria to the Alexandria on The Nile.  But I wonder about the Aegyptus the family of Jesus fled to in Matthew 2, since it drew on an Old Testament reference.  And maybe it would have been safest for them to leave what Rome Controlled, since Herod had Rome’s backing.

The presence of Camels in Mizraim is among things cited as evidence that it seems more likely to be Arabia then Africa.  And the basis for finding “Pharaoh” in Egyptian records is pretty flimsy, coming from a word that referred to the Royal Palace, and even then is kind of forced.

The ancient nation of Kemet not only did practice Circumcision, but to secular historians they provide the oldest known documentation of it, from the Saqqara tomb of the 5th Dynasty Ka-Priest Ankh-Mahor.  And Hellenistic Greek writers seem to consider the Jews practice of Circumcision evidence of their Egyptian origins.  However I was mistaken about Exodus implying Mizraim didn’t practice circumcision, we don't know one way or the other.  We don’t know if Moses himself was circumcised, the issue was Moses son.  The narrative in Exodus 4 is more implying Zipporah/Jethro’s family didn’t practice it, which I feel deconstructs assumptions they descended from Abraham.  They are either Kenite/Cushite or both, maybe the Kenites were a Cushite clan.  Part of this speculation is if the Cushite wife Moses married was the same person as Zipporah or not.

Which reminds me, I’ve already discussed how Africa wasn’t the only place where you could find Cushites.  So that should be considered when discussing passages where Mizraim and Cush are mentioned together.  In the Greek Mythology, maybe Belus’ son Cephus was Cush.

On the subject of Mizraim having something to do with the Hyksos.  We call them the Hyksos because of what Manetho wrote in Greek, the records of Kemet call them the Amu, maybe Amu could come from the Anamim, one of the sons of Mizraim.  A number of Mizraim’s sons in Genesis 10 are lined to regions of the Nile valley, but again these seem to be Semitic names applied to those regions later, not what they originally called themselves.  The Ludim and Lahubim have been proposed as alternatives to Phut for the origins of some of the people we call Libyans, but names like those did exist in Arabia too, and perhaps some of the Libyans also came via the Hyksos.  Caphtor is the most controversial son of Mizraim (The Philistines came from him not Calushim, that’s a KJV mistake), attempts to make Caphtor Crete have never impressed me.  Kamal Slaibi’s section on Mizraim and his sons seems to make strong cases for locations linked to the Taif region.

“Where does Kemet fit into the Table of Nations (Genesis 10) then?” You may ask.  Also according to archeology Kemet often controlled the Holy Land.  So they must be in The Bible somewhere?

Some Egyptologists think the early people of Kemet were a variety of tribes from different origins, some southern in origin and some northern.  The name Kemet can be considered evidence they were at least partly Hamite.  I did a post arguing that Seir and the Horites of Genesis 36 were the historical figures behind Osiris and Horus.  At the time I did that post still assuming Mizraim was Kemet.

But that Kemet practiced Circumcision as early as the 5th Dynasty, makes me think it possible they partly come from Abraham.  Since it seems to me like Genesis 17 is introducing that whole idea.  (And yes that means I even consider Circumcision practiced by Native Americans evidence of Abrahamic ancestry for them).  As different groups fell to idolatry how they practiced it may have been corrupted, but I still see it’s existence as evidence of coming from Abraham.  The Genesis 36 connection could provide a connection to Edom.  According to the African writer Olaudah Equiano, the 18th-century English theologian John Gill believed the African people were descended from Abraham via Keturah. [Equiano, Olaudah (1995). The Interesting Narrative and Other Writings. Penguin Books. p. 44. ISBN 0-14-243716-6.]  That includes suggesting that the name Africa came from Epher.  I doubt Kemet per say is what they had in mind, but Circumcision was part of the argument.

Naturally much of my revised Chronology speculation would be defunct if this is true.  But even conventional Chronology is dependent on some Biblical synchronisms.  The belief that Shishak was Shoshenq of the 22nd/Libyan dynasty is the only reason Shoshenq is placed as early as he is.  If we only tweak the chronology by a century or so, the Kingdom period begins about where the Third Intermediate Period does.  And since my date for the Exodus is older than most, about 1606 BC.  Even in conventional Chronology I could place it close to when the Middle Kingdom ended.

So in that case, times in which Kemet ruled the land of Israel would be mostly the Judges period or before.  Could they be identified with one of the oppressors?  The usual identification of Kemet with Misraim has made it weird that Misraim isn’t listed as one during this 450 year period.  Maybe theories about identifying the Midianites and/or Amalekites with Hyksos tribes could still be true.  But if the Horites/Horim were an offshoot of the Hivites, perhaps Kemet was a Canaanite nation.  But the Judges narrative focuses mainly on the Northern Tribes seemingly.  Another difficult to identify tribe in Judges is the Maonites.

The initial reason I looked into Revised Chronology wasn’t even about Shishak or the Exodus, but about how Kemet conventionally predates both Ussher and my own dates for The Flood.  So it’s still in my interest to make Kemet younger, though there are reasons I have become open to older Flood dates.  And I’m still compelled by evidence that the supposed 26th Dynasty was really the 19th Dynasty.  If it’s also possible some Mizraimites were among the Hyksos, that also keeps in consideration my model making Shishak a Hyksos, and the Amarna period contemporary with Shalmaneser V.  There are reasons to speculate the 19th Dynasty might have been of Hyksos stock.

Going back to the Greek mythology discussed above.  The Genealogy of Belus is also traced back to Greece, to Inachus King of Argos.  Robert Graves believed Inachus descended from Iapetus(Japheth).  This is ignored in many theories about the history behind those myths, including my above making Belus Ham and Aegyptus Mizraim.  But the Greek mythology is garbled, so some conflicting influences could exist.  My basis for making Egypt a head of Daniel 7 is based on the Ptolemaic Dynasty being one of the divisions of Alexander’s Empire.  But I’ve also proposed a second meaning for the four heads of the Leopard being Javan, that they correspond to Javan’s four sons.   So perhaps it’d seal up that argument even more if I can justify identifying a son of Javan with the land Ptolemy ruled.

This is NOT me trying to argue ancient “Egyptians” were “White” as some websites do.  I’ve already discussed why I do not believe we should expect a perfect correlation between Noah’s sons and Ethnic features.  I do think even early on Kemet might have been more diverse than most give it credit for.  But they were overall a brown or dark skinned people, regardless of which son of Noah they came from.

Cyprus was also strongly linked to the Ptolemaic Dynasty, and Kittim son of Javan was most anciently a name for Cyprus.  In my reexamination of assumptions about Daniel 11, I’ve questioned the common idea that the Ships of Kittim refers to Rome.  Ancient Kemet often controlled Cyprus as well.

A second candidate for a son of Javan being Kemet could be Tarshish.  The location and identity of Tarshish has been complicated by a few factors, one being that it’s seemingly a nation Israel had contact with both via their Mediterranean ports like Joppa, and the Red Sea port at Elath.  We usually don’t consider Kemet an option since we think they’re Mizraim, but perhaps we should rethink that.  They are the easiest nation to think of as one Israel cold trade with via both ports.  Tarshish is also the Hebrew word for Beryl.  Kemet was a source of much Beryl in antiquity.  In fact it’s been suggested that Kemet was the only source of Beryl for much of antiquity.  So could the Hebrew language have named that stone after who they got it from?

Remember, Ezekiel is contemporary with the Mizraim of Necho.  So it’s interesting that when mentioning nations who traded with Tyre in chapter 27, he mentioned Mizraim in 6-7, sandwiched between Kittim and Elishah, two sons of Javan.  Tarshish is mentioned latter, twice, at a point when he’s already began repeating some names, yet Mizraim doesn’t come up a second time.

I’ve read recently that even Kemet as a name they called themselves first shows up around the eleventh dynasty.  My attempts to find other names they called themselves are proving difficult.  Maybe we simply don’t know, since we mostly have their records of interacting with others.

Maybe their words for Earth are clues to what they called themselves, since people often view the world as revolving around themselves.  The father of Osiris, Isis and Set in mythology was Geb, originally pronounced Seb or Keb, who was a god of the Earth, unlike other mythologies where that is usually a goddess.  Could that be Seba, the first born son of Cush?  Also mentioned in Psalm 72:10 and Isaiah 43:3.  Linked to Tarshish in one of those and to Mizraim in the other.  Isaiah 45:14 also refers to Sabeans from Seba with Mizraim and Cush.  Isaiah is late enough for the beginning of Mizraim’s association with the Nile.

The 22nd and I think also 23rd Dynasties of Kemet were of Libyan origin, that is Biblically usually identified as Phut.  Though some might suggest all this placing of Mizraim and Cush in Arabia might force us to put Phut there.  But I feel Ezekiel 38 is definitely associating Phut with the West, which includes North Western Africa, because of how it ties into Revelation 20 and the Four Corners/Winds references of that book.

Is it possible the "Arabians who were by Cush" in the time of Jehoram King of Judah were the people ruling Kemet at that time?

What about the Eschatological significance of Mizraim/Egypt I’ve been looking into on my Prophecy Blog?  How does this change and recontextualize all of that?  Well in a sense the main smoking gun of my Egyptian Beast theory was Ezekiel 29-32, so the Mizraim of Necho.  Same mostly with my England and Egypt post.  And Daniel 11 still has to involve the Ptolemaic Dynasty since they ruled the Negev.  But Deuteronomy 28 and Hosea seem to foretell Israel returning to Mizraim in the clear sense of returning to where they were Slaves.  Chad Schafer has been selling a book predicated on applying that to the Roman Egypt of Africa.  In the long run they do also get scattered to all the nations.

Josephus does definitely tell us the Roman Province of Egypt played a role in the Roman Captivity.  But plenty of Jews of the Roman Captivity also wound up in Arabia, Jewish populations of Arabia and Yemen (and the Lemba whose oral history says they were in Arabia and Yemen for a while) mostly trace their history back to the Roman or Babylonian Captivity.  At the beginning of Wars of The Jews Josephus refers to there still being many Jews of the Babylonian Captivity in the extremity of Arabia.

However the Northern Kingdom’s Captivity, which is what Hosea is specifically about, seems to go the opposite direction whether Mizraim is in Arabia or Africa, with Assyria traditionally carrying them beyond the Euphrates River.  Well the Transjordan Tribes were arguably in Arabia to begin with.  I believe Biblically everything between the Jordan and the Euphrates is given to Ishmael, Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh were allowed to stay there even though their desire to do so is presented as bad.  And some maps apparently put locations called Gad and Reuben along the Persian Gulf, near where Saudi Arabia and Oman meet.

1 Kings 14:15 is taken as an example of “The River” without qualification presumably meaning the Euphrates, but maybe it doesn’t.  Damien Mackay’s interpretation of the Book of Tobit involves suggesting that the Medes of the Northern Kingdom’s scattering are mistaken for the Midian and Medan of Keturah in Arabia, possibly including Medina which was a Jewish settlement in the time of Muhammad called Yathrib.  Maybe the Habor of 2 Kings 17:6 could be Khaybar, another Israelite settlement in Arabia at the time of Muhammad.  And Maybe Gozen is a variation of Goshen?  That hypothesis has problems, but it’s interesting.  But I generally don’t think too highly of Mackay’s scholarship.  

And I think Simeonites wound up in Yemen, specifically the Jaminite clan descended from Jamin, who the name Yemen might come from.  Plus the coincidence of Simeon being associated with his own Sheba.  That would be independent of the Northern Kingdom’s conquest, but a further migration of the Simeonites who conquered Seir and the Amalekites at the end of 1 Chronicles 4.

Hosea 8:13 and 9:3 says Ephraim will return to Mizraim.  Some have seen allusions to Islam prophetically in Hosea 9, with talk of an evil Madman Prophet, and the Hebrew word some Muslims want to see as a form of Muhammad's name elsewhere.  BTW, Moph is the Hebrew word translated Memphis here.  Other Bible passages presumed to refer to Memphis are Noph, mostly used of the Misraim of Necho, but once in Isaiah 19.  Noph is closer to what Kemet actually called Memphis, but still not exactly, with it becoming Men-Nefer only at a late New Kingdom point.

Chad Schafer however makes part of his “The whole world is Egypt now” theory supported by Hosea 11:5 allegedly contradicting 8 and 9 by saying Israel won’t return to the “Land of Mizraim”.  Well maybe that’s because they’re returning to Misraim when Misraim wasn’t in their original land anymore?  But perhaps the context of Hosea 11:5 should be understood as being before the full captivity happened, when they were tributaries of Assyria for awhile.  Chapter 11 is like a summary of Israel’s history.

Associating Mizraim with the Antichrist becomes a strong Islamic Antichrist argument in this context.  Mizraim like Islam started in Arabia and then came to rule Kemet.  Which leads to a theory I have on where in Arabia to look for Mizraim.  One important Caliphate even having its capital at Cairo.

In Velikovsky's argument for the Amalakites being the Hyksos, he claims Arab historians say Amalek at some point left Arabia to rule Egypt.   This is based on Islamic traditions about the Jurhum tribe, who are sometimes said to be Amalakites, but this is one of a few things the Islamic sources are confused on.  The Jurhum are the tribe said to have controlled the Kaaba/Mecca between the death of Nabioth son of Ishmael, and the coming of the presumably Yemenite Banu Khuza’a.  What’s interesting though is it’s said when Ishmael become old enough to marry, he married the daughter of a Jurhumite, who become the mother of his children.  Genesis 21 says Ishmael married a Mizraimite woman when he settled in Paran.  The second half of Jurhum sounds like it could come from Ham, thus the land of the Jurhum being a Land of Ham.  So could the Jurhum of Islamic sources be Mizraim?  The Taif region is near Mecca.

1 Kings 11 in it’s bio of Hadad king of Edom also seems to support placing Mizraim in or south of Paran.  And it’s not just Muslims who said Paran was the Hijaz where Mecca is, Eusebius and Jerome before Muhammad placed it in Arabia Deserta, a very specific Roman term for the deserts of Saudi Arabia, it can’t include parts of Jordan or the traditional Sinai Peninsula.  This would make theories about Mecca being exactly where Kadesh-Barnea or Sinai was wrong, which I’d favored in the past.  Velikovsky based his Barnea=Mecca theory on confusing the Banu Khuza’a with the Israelites at the time of Moses.  Maybe a Sinai in Yemen theory could still work, but I’m kind of leaving that theory too.

Joseph while in Mizraim married the daughter of a Priest of On.  “On” here is commonly taken to refer to the city in Kemet the Greeks called Heliopolis, (but the natives called it Iwnw, a name that could come from Javan interestingly, and also House of Ra).  But the Hebrew spelling is the same as Aven, which is possibly used of Heliopolis in Ezekiel.  But most often Aven and Beth-Aven is used as a derogatory term for Beth-El when Israel was in disobedience.  In Islamic tradition the oldest name for the Kaaba was Beytullah, an Arabic equivalent of Beth-El.  So could the On/Aven of Mizraim be Mecca?  Aven is also used in the Hebrew of Isaiah 19 (translated destruction) leading to theories Heliopolis is mentioned there.  Could Mecca be the Altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Mizraim?  Or the Pillar at the Border?  A Pillar better fites what the Kaaba is.

Kamal Salibi’s Israel in Arabia theory seems to be based partly on making the Beth-El of Israel the same as Mecca.  But that doesn’t work, why would the Islamic traditions leave out Jacob’s connection to it?  And Genesis never linked Ishmael to Beth-El.  The Aven of Mizraim is more likely to be Mecca.

Maybe the Baca of Psalm 84:6 that many identify with Mecca/Bakkah makes sense as a location Israel passed as they were leaving Egypt.

The Kaaba is also sometimes referred to in Arabic as Kabat-ullah.  So maybe the name Aegyptos could come from Ha-Kabat?

Some think Shishak must have taken the Ark, I've generally disagreed with that, yet also disagreed with what most consider the main argument against it.   Perhaps this adds new context to theories that the Ark wound up in Mecca?

The Jurhum of Islamic Tradition are said to have become highly immoral and corrupt, but not to have become Polytheists or Idolaters.  It was a ruler of the Banu Khuza’a who first placed the Hubal Idol in the Kaaba.  Well again the Biblical Mizraim, at least of The Torah and even of Solomon’s time, don’t seem to be depicted as Polytheist Idolaters either.

I know that subverts a lot of assumptions.  Countless commentaries asserting that each Plague attacked a specific god of Kemet’s pantheon, (but not all agreeing on how to line them up).  And assuming the Golden Calf was based on Apis even though there is plenty of precedent for Bull based Idols in the Near East, including a Bull association for Baal in the Ugarit Baal cycle.  And a mountain in/near Mecca has a name implying some ancient Bull worship association, usually cited in theories trying to place Sinai there.  But you’ll only find references to Idols of Egypt in Isaiah 19 and in Ezekiel, and we see other polytheist allusions in Jeremiah and Daniel 11 about the Ptolemies.  

Yahuah does not seem to have objected to intermarriages with Mizraimites the way he did Canaanites or Moab and Ammon because of their Idolatry.  Joseph married the daughter of a Priest without it being a problem.  And that daughter has a clearly Semitic name, Asenath.  Her name has never been linked by scholars to a god native to Kemet, but a possible connection to Anath has been suggested.  Fortunately for the mainstream view Anath worship did come to Kemet, usually presumed to have started with the Hyksos, she’d sometimes been identified with Neith.

Leviticus 24 contrary to your assumptions does not blame that Blasphemous Israelite’s Blasphemy on having a Misraimite father.  But even if there was, Blaspheming the name of Yahuah is a distinct Sin from worshiping other gods.

In 1 Kings 11 the Daughter of Pharaoh is not actually defined as complicit in the other wives leading Solomon into idolatry, there is no reference to any Graven Image being built to a Mizraimite Idol.  Her customs are implied to be incompatible with proper Torah worship, but that is still different from being an Idolater.

Exodus 8:26 does NOT use the Hebrew word for Abomination that is a synonym for Idol, but Tovah.  The context is also clearly using it of the thing being sacrificed, not what it’s sacrificed to.  Likewise with Genesis 43:32 and 46:34, where there it is things the Mizraimites consider Tovah being mentioned.  Ezra 9:1 is also Tovah, with the context clearly being of customs.  Deuteronomy 29:16-17 uses the word Abomination that means Idols.  And the context is using it of other nations not Mizraim.

The phrase “Gods of Mizraim” is used in Exodus 12:12 however.  It’s not used of all the Plagues but of specifically the killing of the First Born.  According to an interlinear Bible Elohim or Elim is not used here, there is no im suffix.  So the translation could be questionable.  There is a Heh though, making it like a Hebrew spelling often used of trees, commonly translated as Elm Trees.  Since this follows Yahuah saying he’ll not only kill first born Humans but even animals, maybe moving on to plant life makes more sense in context.  

If they were worshiping a false god, it could have been a singular one, perhaps the Allah of Mecca is the god who Yahuah said he would destroy?

In Exodus 5 Phar’oh says he “Knows not Yahuah”, but Melchizedek of Salem didn’t know God under that name either, he was simply the Priest of Elyon.  And there are references to Mizraim having Magicians, but plenty of Magicians in history have claimed to not be serving any god but the Biblical God.

The traditional genealogy of the Banu Khuza’a traces the king who placed the Hubal idol on the Kaaba back to a Babulon son of Sheba or Saba.  Because they presumably came from Yemen they are assumed to be Joktanite by the tradition, and so probably the Sheba son of Joktan of Genesis 10.  But 1 Chronicles 5:13 mentions a Sheba as a chief among the Transjordan Tribes (Manasseh specifically, so descendents of Asenath).  As they made war with the Hagarites and other Ishmaelites.  So could the Banu Khuza’a be Israelites in Arabia?  Muhammad had some Khuza’a ancestry, though Patrilineally he went back to Adnan of Kedar.  A Sheba having a son named Babylon makes more sense in the timeframe of the Assyrian captivity, when enemies of Assyria often counted Babylon as an ally, like in Isaiah 21.  And the Nabatean Hubal Idol makes more sense with coming from the Trans-Jordan then it does with coming from Yemen which I’m pretty sure had a distinct pantheon.

There was again also a Sheba as a location in Simeon.  If the Jurhum traditions are based on some sort of confused merging of Mizraim and Amalak, maybe the end of 1 Chronicles 4 sets the stage directly for the Banu Khuza’a coming to Mecca?

The Red Sea (Yam Suf in Hebrew) crossing is the main difficulty I have here.  Others have argued for some variation of making it not the Red Sea.  And translating Suf as a reference to the color Red on it’s own would be wrong.  But Solomon’s Yam Suf port was on the Gulf of Aqaba.  Maybe like some other names in the Bible it referred to more than one thing.  Or maybe the Red Sea used to have some other branches going into Arabia now dried up.  

I’d considered having them go the other way.  Maybe placing the wandering in mostly Ethiopia and Sudan.  Or ironically using the Wyatt and Cornuke Red Sea Crossing site for a wandering in the traditional Sinai peninsula.  But ultimately no, I still think the full testimony of Scripture places the wandering in Arabia.  And I recently argued for Sinai being in Iraq or Kuwait.  Which includes the Kadesh where Miriam and Aaron died being Petra.

Could the aftermath of the Plagues God inflicted upon Mizraim be part of why Arabia become such a barren wasteland?

I’m not 100% going all in on this yet.  But after resisting it for a long time, I’ve come to conclude this is most likely the case.