Customer Reviews

Solving the Exodus Mystery, Vol. 1: Discovery of the True Pharaohs of Joseph, Moses, and the Exodus

5 star:		(13)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This is an exhaustively detailed analysis of the historical basis of the biblical Exodus account.

The author shows why Egyptian Sothic chronologies are wrong and unfixable and examines hundreds of aspects of the literature and archaeology. He finds 436 points of agreement between Biblical accounts and present-day archaeology, once the chronology is matched to uncalibrated radiocarbon dating and an eclipse. He compares his analysis with the consensus view and theories of Courville, Ailing, Rohl, Kitchen and Velikovsky.

Most (but not all) archaeologists reject the historicity of the Exodus account. The walls of Jericho "fell 300 years before Joshua", there is "no evidence of Israel in Egypt or the Exodus", etc.

Although this leaves the history of Israel practically inexplicable, many have found such scholarly declarations persuasive; reason enough to doubt the Biblical record and fall away from their faith. After 24 years of studying the problem, the author demonstrates the discordance is due to systematically
incorrect times being assigned to Egyptian dynasties #1-20.

For much of its history, Egypt had a 365 day/yr calendar. Using observations of astronomically fixed risings of the star Sirius (recorded in Egyptian literature with calendar dates), a "Sothic" dating system was constructed. This provided the framework for Egyptian history, which itself became the source chronology for most of the region.

Problem is, there were at least two times when Egypt switched between 360 and 365 day systems. There were also periods of 354/355 day calendars. This renders the Sothic system useless, a problem Egyptologists seem unaware of. For every year spent under a 360 day/yr calendar system, Sothic dates shift 20 years (compared to a 365 day/yr result). Since many decades were recorded under different calendars, and the switch points aren't known, Sothic dates actually spin through complete cycles, like a roulette wheel.

There were many hints something was wrong; radiocarbon dates of wood in tombs were off. Since the astronomically fixed Sothic system was trusted as absolute, radiocarbon dates were adjusted ("calibrated") to agree.

But when dates are moved backward 300 years (to match the unadjusted (unfudged) radiocarbon dating and an eclipse), the author finds 436 points of agreement between Biblical history and the 12th Dynasty history of Egypt and Mid-East. He identifies Sesotris I as Pharaoh of Joseph, Sesotris III as Pharaoh of the Oppression, Amenemhet III who drove Moses into exile and Amenemhet IV the Pharaoh whose crown now lies on the bottom of the Red Sea.

The 12th dynasty was a peak of power for Egypt, but ended under obscure circumstances. Amenemhet IV has no pyramid or tomb. He vanishes from record and his wife Soboknefru ascended to the throne (not his first-born son) in a period of great turmoil for 3 years until she was deposed.

For a description of the time, there is the Leiden Papyrus 344, the writings of Ipuwer, a 12th Dynasty priest of the sun god Ra at Heliopolis. He laments social chaos in Egypt, describing 8 of the 10 plagues recorded in the Bible as well as a king "killed by pouring water". One of many interesting lines:

"Lo, the hot-tempered say 'if I knew where god is I would serve him'..."

As a pagan sun-worshipping society, Egyptians would know where their "god" was ... unless this is not a reference to their god ...

Professional Egyptologists say this papyrus is non-historical. Why? As the translator puts it, it's fiction because it is inherently contradictory. On the one hand, the land is said to suffer from total want; on the other hand, the poor are described as having become rich. The translator says this contradiction is "historically impossible". So that's that! Never mind the Biblical Exodus account explains it.

Secular archaeologists start with the assumption that any document describing miracles or the supernatural is fictional. They reject the content to construct an alternate naturalistic version to explain it away. Instead of following the evidence, like the Leiden Papyrus, they discount it because it does not fit their anti-supernatural bias. They will instead tell you to your face there is no Egyptian record of the Exodus.

In truth, even if such people witnessed the Exodus, there would be many who would deny it the next day, let alone 3500 years after the fact. Evidence of the truth the Exodus, an intervention of God in history not amenable to naturalistic explanation, undermines pride-and-power conceits of humans.

The author, unlike myself, wisely refrains from such polemic interludes and the book's material is presented neutrally, if enthusiastically.

The book could have used an editor; there is substantial repetition. The calendar discussion could be much clearer; if you don't know much about calendars and astronomy, you won't figure it out here. Being a key point, that's too bad. There is no index (but 100s of references to Egyptological literature).

The book emphasizes documents. I recommend also "The Exodus Case" by Moller. This high-quality book has hundreds of photos relevant to the archaeology of the Exodus, such as from the floor of the Red Sea. Published in Sweden, Amazon does not sell it. Web searching will reveal the U.S. distributor in Wisconsin.

A single point of history, or artifact, is subject to interpretation. But when you have hundreds of them, they tend to fit together only one way, like a puzzle. Stewart may well have solved it, even if some details over-reach. It may take majority-archaeology years or decades to come to grips with this
material, but there is no reason for you to wait...

Several scholars recently have tried to revise Egyptian chronology because of a growing consensus that it is necessary to shorten our traditional chronology by several hundred years. Each writer suggests a different solution. I believe Stewart has the best solution and may have finally "solved" this problem. His solution includes analyzing the Sothic, or astronomical, dating method and the carbon and tree-ring dating methods, and the traditional lists of pharaohs. So his solution is reached by scholarly means. And his new chronology now matches Bible history.

Most people with more than a passing interest in archeology have been confronted with the disparity between Biblical History and the asserted facts found in archeologic studies of the Bible lands. When I first read the claim by Mr. Stewart that he had found information that would leave almost every professional archeologist in error, I suspected that this book would find it's way to the heap of conspiracy theories behind most used bookstores. A further perusal of the cover notes revealed a commendation by a professor that I knew from my days at Texas Tech University. By the time that I finished the first 50 pages of Stewart's book, I knew that this was probably the most valuable book on Biblical archeology that I own.
Stewart does not purport to have any special knowledge or undiscovered manuscripts. Using materials that are largely available to most people, and some astronomy calculations that can be replicated, he shows that archeological data itself allows for a re-dating of the Twelfth Egyptian Dynasty by placing it 300 years later than where most archeologists have placed it. This "new" dating almost exactly matches the Carbon-14 dates from known Twelfth Dynasty tombs, and by examination of astronomical events that were documented in the hieroglyphs and papyri of this dynasty, the re-dating is also found to be probable.
Mr. Stewart's conclusion is that the archeologic, astrologic and scientific dating methods all substantiate a later dating of the Twelfth Dynasty of Egypt. When these events are then examined with a corresponding Bible timeline, there is an amazing synchronicity with the events recorded in the Old Testament involving the movement of Israel into Egypt, their sojourn and enslavement in Lower Egypt, and their return to the Land of Canaan.
I was amazed that Mr. Stewart's methods are neither contrived nor strained. He does not deny the facts of archeology, or lead the readers on such contorted routes that they are left wondering, "Where in the world did that come from?"
The critic who fails to read the book will be left supposing that the author is just someone trying to prove what they already believe, regardless of what the archeologic facts actually yield. In so doing, the critic will have committed the same error himself, and never discover that Mr. Stewart is both able and happy to prove what he sat out to do: Archeologic facts substantiate what Moses recorded, and that Mr. Stewart has identified approximately 436 synchronisms that join archeology and the Bible in an incredible harmony.
This book should be in the library of every Bible student and student of the archeology of the Bible lands.

After having read a number of books on the Exodus and other events related to Biblical history and archeology, I found this book the most scholarly and thorough analysis of them all, and was surprised that the author is not a professional archeologist.

Although some reviewers here have criticized his "lack of adequate editing" (no big publishing house at his disposal), the book is still very readable. Ted Stewart also had a choice between an easy chronological read and a convincing scholarly scientific dissertation. He wisely chose the latter, since he breaks important new ground and must convince the "experts" first. (If you want to compare this with a junk-science book, take a look at "The Exodus Case" by Lennart Moller, filled with contradictions and miraculous explanations to fill the gaps.)

Sometimes career scholars become so invested in a narrow academic groove that they can't see the forest for the trees. There have been so many inconsistencies between traditional archeological Egyptian dating and the dates of other Middle Eastern events, but the conventional assumption has long been that Egyptian chronology must be the correct one. However, in David Rohl's book "Pharaohs and Kings", this is convincingly contradicted by the solar eclipse mentioned in one of the 18th Dynasty Amarna letters to the sun-worshipping Pharaoh Akhenaton, shortly after his father Amenhotep III's death. That letter describes a solar eclipse near sunset in late spring at Ugarit in the eastern Mediterranean, considered an evil omen which was fulfilled soon thereafter by the burning of a palace there. This rare eclipse has been dated by computer astronomical calculations to 1012 BC (3 centuries later than the conventional Egyptian chronology), on May 9 at 6:09 PM!

Ted Stewart takes this proof plus a numbingly thorough review of the Sothic dates (the rising of the star Sirius as recorded and dated by Egyptian priests), showing much better astronomical correlation by computer with this revised chronology. He also shows many other correlating synchronisms to well-known Biblical events. One of these is the late 12th Dynasty Ipuwer Papyrus, which describes 8 of the 10 Biblical Plagues followed by the death of the Pharaoh "by pouring water". This Pharaoh's tomb is the only one of his Dynasty that does not exist in his family's burial compound (or any other known location), although his butler's tomb is there! The Nile is a placid stream with no "pouring water" in Egypt, although there are strong tides in the Red Sea. Moses' Exodus account and the Egyptian account of the Pharaoh don't mention each other's names, following the prevailing cultural concept then of not dignifying one's enemy leader by name.

By contrast, some people still call the great 19th Dynasty Pharaoh Rameses II (3 centuries later) "the Pharaoh of the Exodus". If so, why is his elderly mummy in the Cairo Museum instead of at the bottom of the Red Sea? Now there's an unscholarly statement!

It's time to take a whole new look at the increasingly discredited traditional Egyptian chronology assumptions (established by European scholars starting with Champollion, the "father of Egyptology", in 1822). Stewart's book convincingly shows why.

As other reviewers have noted below, this book does have it's weaknesses, in that it needs an editorial touch, and is repetitive in places (which is why I gave it 4 stars instead of 5).

But the scholarship is top-notch. This book provides incredible insights into the book of Genesis and early Egypt through its synthesis of the history of the times.

For example, Stewarts analysis of the rise of Sesostris I and the impact of Joseph (the son of Jacob) as his vizier on the power and economy of Egypt brings the period alive and explains many things. Equally impressive is Stewart's chapters on Amenemhet IV, the Pharoah of the Exodus, and what happened during the days of Moses.

I highly recommend this book.

The reviewer who titles his review as "Vanity Press and throwback to old-stlye biblical archaeology" has done the unspeakable. He attacks the credibility of the book without offering anything other than incendiary statements to support his claim. His review raises the real question as to whether or not the reviewer has even read the book or just has a personal axe to grind with certain religious views. I have read the book and while its conclusions support ancient biblical stories, it is based on logical and sound interpretation of archaeological and historical evidence. It points out real problems with conventional chronology for the Ancient Near East and Egypt and supports its claims with credible and scholarly evidence. While one may not agree with its conclusions, it is hard to read this book and say it is not written in a scholarly fashion. Yes, it is true that just because there is a Kansas this does not prove the Wizard of Oz. And just because someone signs their review as "a reader" does not mean it is so. This book is well worth the read and will challenge the best of the scholars with difficult issues and novel, but scholarly solutions.

This book could really use an editor (or one who is more a professional editor than a friend of the author). The fact that his wife took this or that picture, for example, just doesn't need to be in the text. Many of the pictures were too small or of too poor a quality to be useful. That said, the author has clearly done his research. The sheer quantity of supporting evidence, much of it rather convincing, more than makes up for the quality of the writing. The author agrees in part with David Rohl's book Pharaohs and Kings, but places the Exodus in the 12th Dynasty of Egypt, which I find more convincing. This is volume 1 of a promised 2-book set.

Ted Stewart's Solving the Exodus Mystery is outstanding other than the small pictures and no index. When Ted's second book comes out many will find he will reference Charles Forster's Sinai Photographed as this was the first book to show the Hebrew writing on the rocks in the Sinai and translates the writing, which in turn gives us the name of the Pharaoh of the Exodus (Amenemhet IV). Ted did an outstanding job putting together all the imformation and pointing out the connections to the dates of each of the Pharaohs' reigns.

Ted didn't have the backing to do a the art work of Roth's Pharaohs and Kings or Moller's The Exodus Case, but of the three Ted's is the most important and should be reprinted with more care to photographs and a better editor.

I recently read Solving the Exodus Mystery by Ted Stewart, a Bible scholar at the Sunset International Bible Institute in Texas. This book adds in a significant way to the mounting body of evidence for a much closer correlation between ancient Palestinan/Near Eastern history as it is recorded in the Hebrew Bible and the History of Egypt. Exciting discoveries by archeologists, historians, and astronomers in the past decade have challenged the immutability of the standard Egyptian chronology long defended by professional Egyptologists. While Stewart's book may never be made into a television documentary like the more specific outside (Egyptology) work of David Rohl, Robert Bauval, and Graham Hancock, it provides the reader with a preponderance of internal or inside evidence which I find totally convincing. Stewart has simply sifted through every shred of evidence available, in a very careful and exhaustive manner. It will be difficult for the professional Egyptologist to dismiss Stewart's conclusions without considering them carefully, but I believe that such careful consideration will lead to yet another revision of the standard chronology of the History of Egypt, and one that brings it into a crisp focus with the History of Israel.

I recently read Solving the Exodus Mystery by Ted Stewart, a Bible scholar at the Sunset International Bible Institute in Texas. This book adds in a significant way to the mounting body of evidence for a much closer correlation between ancient Palestinan/Near Eastern history as it is recorded in the Hebrew Bible and the History of Egypt. Exciting discoveries by archeologists, historians, and astronomers in the past decade have challenged the immutability of the standard Egyptian chronology long defended by professional Egyptologists. While Stewart's book may never be made into a television documentary like the more specific outside (Egyptology) work of David Rohl, Robert Bauval, and Graham Hancock, it provides the reader with a preponderance of internal or inside evidence which I find totally convincing. Stewart has simply sifted through every shred of evidence available, in a very careful and exhaustive manner. It will be difficult for the professional Egyptologist to dismiss Stewart's conclusions without considering them carefully, but I believe that such careful consideration will lead to yet another revision of the standard chronology of the History of Egypt, and one that brings it into a crisp focus with the History of Israel.