EXODUS CONSPIRACY movie blog

Film Update

2010-12-20T12:53:00.005-06:00

From: Tim Mahoney – Director and Producer

Dear Friends,

I’d like to thank you for your extraordinary patience as you wait for the Exodus film to be released. You deserve an explanation for this very long wait and I will address the reasons for the multiple delays in this letter.

First, the primary reason this film has taken so long to complete is that it has become a much larger project then any of us ever imagined. Had I known what this film would become, I would never have had the courage to accept such an endeavor.

What began in 2002, as a 1-hour television program conducting a scientific investigation into the Red Sea crossing, has now grown into an epic feature documentary with hundreds of hours of information, interviews, and footage surrounding the topic. Complicating matters was the difficulty we experienced getting scholars to speak openly about these topics on camera as well as the difficulty of getting footage in certain areas of the Middle East. This led us to name the film, EXODUS Conspiracy.

Tim Mahoney filming Lennart Moller at the Red Sea

Another reason for the delay in releasing the film has been the challenge to understand how to communicate this information in the form of a concise and creative story. As I continue to learn at every stage of this journey, this film is a complex mix of the biblical text, tradition, history, politics, religion, DNA, geography, prophecy, adventure, and the biases and conventions of Egyptology, archeology and science. Add to that the questions of what does this all mean for today and for the future, and you have quite a daunting task to make sense of it all.

When the website went live in May of 2008, we felt we were closing in on the completion of the film and within one year of a possible release. So we promoted the film with this in mind. For that I apologize. After multiple test showings of a rough-cut version of the film in several US cities and Jerusalem, I knew in my heart that the film wasn’t finished. The film was good but was missing something. The message was not quite on track.

After returning to the states, I enlisted additional scholars to review the film. This was reported in our last film update on April 7, 2009 and we still believed we were not far from the finish line. What I thought would take 90 days has taken nearly two years. However, the wait and the effort have made any previous attempts in producing this film pale in comparison. In the interim, new sources contributing their evidence to the story have been incorporated, adding to its power.

I’d like to share the good news that we have just finished putting the final touches on the script. We have identified the production needs for the new material and are now planning the final series of interviews, narration and editing in the coming months. I think you will find the results immensely satisfying.

In this final version of the film, we still address the opposition to the topic of the Exodus, but the emphasis on conspiracy has been reduced. This opens up the film to explore one of the greatest questions I believe one can ask: “Is there evidence that the God of the Bible interacts in human history?"

This change of focus will result in a new title for the film. We are considering our list of options for this title but have not made a final decision. There will also be no further updates until the film is finished so we can focus all available time and energy on finishing the film. But when that time comes, we will let you know with a new website. Don’t be alarmed when you see portions of the current website coming down.

The simple fact remains that our release date is officially To Be Determined. We understand your desire to see the film. We share that desire more than you know. We continue to move ahead with plans to release the film to the world in the strongest way possible, treating this material with the high regard that it deserves.

Sincerely,

Tim Mahoney
Director – Exodus Film (Working Title)

Was Rameses II the Pharaoh of the Exodus?

2010-03-30T15:28:00.003-05:00

The last two blog postings have laid out a biblical case for dating the Exodus some time around 1446 BC. This was not meant to set that date in stone but to give a general frame of reference for the investigation into the historical event of the Exodus. The previous posts were needed to lay the groundwork for today’s topic that gets to the heart of the matter.

Skeptics like to ask, “If the Exodus actually happened, why the lack of evidence?” Curiously, they don’t accept the historical account in the Bible as evidence, while they do accept the ancient writings from other cultures. But putting that point aside, two of the main reasons that so little Exodus evidence has been found (or recognized) are that people are looking in the wrong places and they are looking in the wrong time periods. Today we will zero in on the second of these two problems. Because if you look for Exodus evidence in the wrong time period, you won’t find any.

Yul Brynner playing Rameses II in The Ten Commandments (1956, Paramount Pictures), from Wikimedia Commons

Part of the dating problem is that the Bible never identifies the pharaoh of the Exodus by name, so dozens of candidates have been proposed based on many different factors of varying validity. The approach of our investigation is to try to ignore academic and religious traditions as much as possible. Then taking what the Bible does say at face value, go out and see if the evidence supports it or not. This avoids the problem of focusing on someone’s theory, when the theory does not really square with what the Bible is saying in the first place. If the Bible’s account is to be fairly tested we must use it as the starting point.

Skepticism about the biblical account of Exodus began to dominate academia when archaeological finds did not match the investigators view of biblical history. A major cause for this discrepancy was a new theory that had swept through the biblical archaeology world. This theory proposed that a proper understanding of the biblical account really pointed to the Exodus occurring not at the early date in 1400’s or 1500’s BC and not even in the 1300’s BC. This new theory designated the 19th Dynasty’s Rameses II, the most prolific builder of all time, as the pharaoh of the Exodus and this meant pushing the date for Exodus forward to around 1250 BC.

Are the views of these prominent Egyptologists about the date of Exodus, supported by overwhelming evidence?

Rameses II as the antagonist who confronted Moses was soon seen everywhere from Hollywood movies, to school textbooks and even in the commentary sections of many Bible’s. But what was the basis for this popular thinking? Was Rameses II really the pharaoh of the Exodus?

The main factor that led many to arrive at the 1250 BC date, was the reference to the Israelite slaves building the store-city of Raamses in Exodus 1:11. The only pharaohs named Rameses reigned after 1300 BC under conventional chronologies. Of these, only Rameses II was known to have built a city. Since his long reign took up most of the 1200’s, they reasoned that the Exodus must have occurred after the middle of his reign in about 1250 BC or after. To hold to this new convention, they had to ignore the other biblical data pointing to a much older Exodus given in the last two blog posts, as well as the majority view of previous generations of scholars.

Video of David Rohl commenting on dating confusion

Early biblical archaeology, working from the viewpoint of a 15th century BC date, showed some promising finds related to the Exodus from Egypt and the conquest of Canaan. But the resulting searches in the new 1250 BC period came up with little evidence. Coupled with this was the evidence from this period that actually contradicted the biblical account. This fueled the trend toward biblical skepticism and it remains the prevailing view in academia to this day. However, many other lines of evidence show that the younger date of 1250 BC is in error and Rameses II was almost certainly not the pharaoh of the Exodus.

Here are the top ten reasons why Rameses II (reigning in the 1200’s BC under conventional chronology) was not the pharaoh of the Exodus:

1) A 1250 BC Exodus does not match the Bible’s chronology. Since 1 Kings 6:1 states that the Exodus occurred 480 years before Solomon’s 4th year, a 1250 BC Exodus would put Solomon’s 4th year at about 770 BC. Historical records, critics and religious traditions all agree that this is a much too recent date for Solomon. Rather, biblical and historical records combine to give Solomon’s 4th year an approximately 966 BC date and thus an Exodus about 1446 BC.

2) At least one pharaoh died between the building of the store-city of Raamses and the Exodus, so Rameses II couldn’t be the pharaoh of both events. The Exodus narrative mentions that the Israelites built a city called Raamses (Exodus 1:11). But the same narrative has Moses being born after this (in chapter 2) and eventually fleeing from a pharaoh to Midian after killing the Egyptian taskmaster. After this, the pharaoh who was reigning at the time of Moses’ flight is explicitly said to have died in Exodus 2:23 and 4:19. This is before Moses returns to Egypt to lead the Exodus. Therefore, Rameses II could not possibly be the builder of the city as well as the pharaoh of the Exodus.

3) Other factors in Moses’ story would necessarily push a Rameses II Exodus to 1150 BC. A second look at the timeframes involved in the Exodus account gives another reason to discount a 1250 BC date derived from Rameses II’s reign. Exodus 2:2-3 has Moses’ birth occurring some years after the building of the store-city of Raamses (Ex. 1:11, 15, 22). Moses was 80 years old at the time of the Exodus. This is based on Deuteronomy 34:7 reporting his death at age 120 at the end of the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Num. 14:33). So the Exodus must have happened more than 80 years after the building of Raamses. Since the city that Rameses II built is purported to have been constructed in the mid 1200’s BC, this would actually push the date for Exodus to at least the mid 1100’s BC in this scenario - a date so recent that even the most skeptical would hesitate to endorse it.

Monuments of Rameses II are the most numerous of any pharaoh

4) There is no archaeological or written evidence of anything related to the disasters of the plagues, the Red Sea drowning or a sudden and massive western Asiatic (Hebrew) slave exodus during the reign of Rameses II. This despite the fact that this era has the best recordkeeping of any in ancient Egypt. This problem also pertains to those scholars who postulate a related theory that Rameses II was the pharaoh of the oppression but his son Merneptah was the pharaoh of the Exodus. However, there are these types of evidences in an earlier chaotic period despite its few records. These will be dramatically highlighted in the film.

5) Rameses is referenced way back in Genesis 47. The Rameses II/1250 BC theory has another problem (that also applies to Merneptah). The Bible states that Jacob and his family settled in the “land” of Rameses way back in Genesis 47:11 when Jacob entered Egypt. Throughout this section of Genesis, Goshen and Rameses are used interchangeably and seem to be geographic references not pertaining to any pharaoh. Significantly, in the biblical account, Genesis 47 took place hundreds of years before the store-city of Raamses was even built and, most would agree, hundreds of years before Rameses sat on his throne.

Scholars generally dismiss the Genesis 47 reference as an anachronism or a later updating of the text so the contemporary audience would understand what location was being discussed. According to one commentary, manuscripts of the Old Testament (Tanakh) copied before the First Century, do show evidence that the scribes were willing to revise or update the specific words of the text while preserving the accuracy. These two things are not contradictory because they assigned to the Scriptures a high degree of authority and upheld them with great reverence, but their desire was for the readers of their time to understand them (ESV Study Bible p. 2586). This would be like texts today saying that William the Conqueror crossed the English Channel in 1066 to invade England, while understanding that it wasn’t called the English Channel at the time and it wouldn’t be called that until around the year 1700. But if this is true, why couldn’t the Exodus 1:11 reference also be a later updating?

Treating both “Rameses” references in the Bible equally, shows that they are both likely names that were updated after the original writing of the Exodus account, or at least had no necessary connection to the pharaoh named Rameses. This frees the Exodus from being tied to Rameses II for whom there is no compelling evidence for being the Pharaoh of the Exodus or the oppression and allows for further investigation around the earlier date derived from the Bible’s chronology and in periods that better fit the biblical narrative.

6) The Plagues, loss of army, and social collapse don’t fit the period of Rameses or Merneptah. The devastating effects of the plagues, the disaster at the Red Sea crossing and the sudden loss of the huge slave population on which their economy was largely based, argue against a 19th Dynasty Exodus. See the blog posting from December 21, 2009 for a closer look at this aspect. In view of this, the period to look for the Exodus is not during one of the most glorious reigns of a pharaoh (Rameses II) in the middle one of the most prosperous and stable periods in Egyptian history (19th Dynasty) but rather during a time of social, political, economic and military collapse in Egypt. A 19th Dynasty Exodus does not fulfill this important criteria.

7) We have the mummies of Rameses II and Merneptah but the Pharaoh of Exodus was drowned at the bottom of the Red Sea. Some cite Exodus 14:30, which states that, “Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the seashore" to postulate that Pharaoh’s body could have been recovered and returned to Egypt for burial.

The thinking that the drowning at the Red Sea would have been observed by other Egyptians, who brought the body back, is predicated on the assumption that the crossing occurred near Egypt. However, the internal geographical evidence in the Bible points strongly to the fact that the crossing was far from Egypt. See the blog entry from December 23, 2008 for details. The Bible claims that all of the Egyptian army went into the sea and all were drowned (Ex. 14:23, 28) so there were none there to bring back his body from this isolated wilderness area. A Jewish historian from the First Century, Philo of Alexandria, wrote in On the Life of Moses, that there “was not even a torchbearer left to carry the news of this sudden disaster back to Egypt.”

Was the body of the pharaoh recovered?

8) Pharaoh drowned in the sea but Rameses II reigned for 66 years and died at the ripe old age of 90. No other pharaoh from this period lived even close to this age. A 90-year-old pharaoh would not have personally led a military campaign. His death in 1213 BC according to conventional chronology does not square with the 1250 BC theory or biblical chronology. Additionally, the text seems to indicate that the pharaoh of the Exodus had recently come to the throne before drowning at the sea (Ex. 2:23, 4:19). One would expect the pharaoh of the Exodus to have a very short reign length of at most a few years and perhaps less than a year. This also applies to Merneptah, who reigned for a total of 10 years.

9) Rameses II and Merneptah did not die in the same year as their firstborn sons. According to the Bible, the pharaoh of the Exodus and his firstborn son died within a few weeks of each other. But Rameses II outlived his firstborn son, Amun-her khepeshef, by 42 years. Merneptah’s eldest son went on to reign long after Merneptah’s death. This does not match the Exodus account of pharaoh’s firstborn dying in the tenth plague.

Some scholars don't believe that the Bible claims that Pharaoh perished in the waters of the Red Sea. They point out that the term “pharaoh” can be used in place of the things pharaoh controlled. For instance, if the text says “pharaoh built a city”, it obviously does not mean that pharaoh himself personally built every brick of the buildings but that he had the city built by his work force. But here are some of the other facts we know about this case. We know from Exodus 14:4, 6 and 8, that Pharaoh personally led the army after the fleeing Israelites.

Many Egyptian sources describe various pharaohs leading their troops into battle and at least one was killed in battle. According to the belief that the pharaoh represented the power of the gods, it seems logical that he would personally lead the army. This also seems to be consistent with other kings and leaders. Joshua went with his army to fight in Joshua 10:7, and the five kings of the Canaanites were also personally involved in the battle as seen in 10:16. The Israelite leaders in the book of Judges led their troops as did Saul who was killed with his sons in battle in 1 Samuel 31:1-6. The Philistine King Achish went to war with his troops as seen in 1 Samuel 28:1-2. Kings of Israel and Judah leading their forces into the battle can be found in 1 Kings 22:29-36.

Exodus 14:23 states that all of the Egyptian forces went into the sea after the people of Israel. Verse 28 then says that all these forces that had followed the Israelites in, were drowned and that not one remained. In the victory song that was sung afterward in Exodus 15:19, according to the Darby translation, it was sung, “For the horse of Pharaoh, with his chariot[s] and with his horsemen, came into the sea, and Jehovah brought again the waters of the sea upon them,” This point and the bracket comes from Dr. Glen Fritz who thinks that the Darby translation is closest to the Hebrew and that “with his chariots” (Hebrew: b’rekbo) should also be singular.

Some critics discount Exodus 15 because it’s a song. But this ignores the fact that in ancient times, songs and poetry were the main way that real historical facts were taught and recalled. As shown by the self-deprecating writings of Moses and the prophets, it was not meant to impose a favorable myth on the next generation. Philo and Josephus both concur that all were lost and Psalm 136:15 reiterates that God “overthrew Pharaoh and his army in the Red Sea.”

Additionally, the whole point of the themes of divine justice and retribution, and God getting glory over his enemies, would lose their punch if Pharaoh himself was not involved. Likewise, that God resists the proud and delights to humble those who lift themselves up; That those who thirst for blood shall have enough of it and those who love to destroy shall themselves be destroyed; For God said, vengeance is mine, I will repay. Rameses living a good long life after the Exodus just does not fit the narrative.

The Merneptah Stele in the Cairo Museum from Wikipedia Commons
under the Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license

10) The Merneptah Stela. Yet another strike against Rameses II or Merneptah being the pharaoh of the Exodus is the campaign of Merneptah in Canaan during his fifth year. On the commemorative stone known as the Merneptah Stele (or the Israel Stele) he claims a resounding victory over the people of Israel in Canaan. But according to the Bible, the children of Israel traveled in the desert after the Exodus before finally entering Canaan 40 years later. So Merneptah could hardly have been the pharaoh of the Exodus and then have defeated Israel in Canaan 5 years later. Even if Rameses II was the pharaoh of the Exodus (ignoring the wrong date and the fact that he should be at the bottom of the Red Sea), the fact that Egypt was able to mount a large-scale invasion of Canaan so soon after the Exodus does not match the biblical account. Moses stated that Egypt was still defeated 40 years after the Exodus in (Dt.11:4) and a confrontation with Egypt is not listed in Joshua’s writings or those of the Judges despite the fact that these books are detailed accounts of Israel’s victories and defeats during that period.

Ramese II was not the pharaoh of the Exodus. The attack on the biblical record because of a lack of solid evidence for the Exodus and conquest in the 1200’s is unwarranted. Looking for evidence of these events in the 1200’s BC is like looking for evidence for America’s Revolutionary War happening at the end of the 20th century. However, when looking at the right time period, a strong pattern of evidence emerges supporting the Exodus. As will be seen in the film, the number and strength of these finds is overwhelming.

- Steve Law, Researcher for the Exodus Conspiracy

Challenges to a 1446 BC Exodus date

2010-02-25T16:43:00.000-06:00

Knowing proper dates is key to understanding and finding evidence for any event in history. Last time, we explored some of the difficulties involved with trying to date ancient events and showed how a biblical date for the Exodus could be determined using the key verse in 1 Kings 6:1. From this we derived an Exodus date of about 1446/1447 BC.

However, there are many traditions and theories that put forward other dates. Why are there such variances and what are the main challenges to a 1446 BC date?

When did the Israelites leave the lushness of the Nile Delta?

One cause of confusion is that ancient Jewish and Christian writers based their chronologies on the year of creation and then counted forward to their own time. Additionally, ancient Hebrew timekeeping tracked years by a lunar calendar that was shorter than a solar year. They had to add an extra month periodically in order to line back up with the solar year and the right seasons. This has become a standardized process in the modern Jewish calendar.

Complicating matters, the cultures surrounding the Israelites sometimes used radically different calendars so when writing about different dating issues, the ancient writers may have been substituting the calculations from these foreign calendars to communicate the biblical numbers. So while the dates they gave can be converted to a BC format, they do not necessarily match the dates from the Gregorian calendar, which was adopted much later in the West.

Ancient chronologists came up with many different dates for creation because of their different treatment of a whole host of variables including whether the Hebrew or Septuagint translation of the Scriptures was used. See (link) for a list of different dates for creation that a span a range of nearly 2400 years.

A second layer of dispute involved the dates between creation and the Exodus. Some of the differing opinions about the number of years in this time-span among just Jewish sources include:
Josephus (writing late in the1st century AD) ... 4053
Demetrius (3rd century BC) ....................... 3839
Seder Olam Rabbah (2nd century AD) ........... 2448
Testament Of Moses (1st century AD) ............ 2420
Book of Jubilees (about 100 BC) .................. 2410
Ancient Christian sources give a similar range. Source: Dr. Stephen Meyers at (link). (We do not necessarily endorse all of Dr. Meyers’ conclusions.)

A third layer of disagreement was the widely divergent claims for the time period between Solomon and later events such as the Captivity or the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD.

Do artifacts in this layer relate to the Exodus? Only a correct time-line can tell you.

With all the uncertainty and variability inherent in using creation as a starting point, it seems better to use a method that eliminates the first two layers of uncertainty and focuses on the period that is best known from other contemporary historical records. Thus the method we used in our last blog posting: using 1 Kings 6:1 as a guide and starting from an event validated in outside sources as well as mentioned in Scripture - the destruction of the Temple and end of the kingdom of Judah in 586 BC. Working backwards using the data given in the Bible, we arrive at Solomon and then the 1446 BC date for Exodus.

What then, are the main challenges to this conclusion? While one could argue with Thiele’s dates for the years in the kings lists, the main challenges to this straightforward thinking are different treatments of the “480 years” referenced in 1 Kings 6:1. These emerge because of a perceived problem with the Bible’s time-line. Reviewing the history of the Israelites after the Exodus, we see that the 480-year period referenced, does not just include the Judges period but is also made up of the 40 years of wandering after the Exodus, the time it took to conquer and occupy the Promised Land in Joshua’s day, Samuel’s time, the reigns of Saul and David and the first four years of Solomon’s reign.

So far, so good. But when you add up the time-spans for the Judges listed in the book of Judges plus the 40 years for Eli listed in 1 Samuel 4:18, it comes to a total of 450 years for the Judges alone! This seems to be a big problem because it just does not fit with the “480 years” reference in 1 Kings 6:1. In order to do so, the total for the Judges period should be at least a hundred years less than this (something closer to a 340 year total). When 450 years for the Judges is added to the other periods between Exodus and Solomon, you come to a total far greater than the 480 years claimed in 1 Kings 6:1.

Here is a list of the different periods listed in Judges (and Eli in 1 Samuel):

Judges total 339: Othniel 40, Ehud 80, Deborah 40, Gideon 40, Abimelech 3, Tola 23, Jair 22, Jephthah 6, Ibsan 7, Elon 10, Abdon 8, Samson 20, Eli 40

Oppressors total 111: Chusham 8, Eglon 18, Sisera 20, Midian 7, Ammon 18, Philistines 40

Grand total of years listed during the Judges period equals 450

There are five main approaches used to explain this discrepancy.

1) The 480-year figure is an error by the writer. This, of course, would mean the Scriptures do not have a divine origin. But even skeptics should admit that all the timeframes given from the books of Judges through Kings, indicate that a careful tracking of the years was being maintained by the Israelites. Even if the writings had a merely human source, it would be extremely unlikely for them to make a mistake about what may be the two most important events in Jewish history. Since the discrepancy is much better explained by the points below, we reject this rash conclusion. We believe the author meant what he said, knew what he was talking about and recorded it accurately.

Looking for clues amongst Egypt's monuments

2) The 480-year figure is a scribal error caused by a copying mistake. Mistakes with numbers are still the biggest source of misprints today despite modern technology, proofreaders and editorial scrutiny. Problems of this nature can be seen in several biblical passages. According to 1 Chronicles 19:18, David slew 7000 Syrian charioteers but in 2 Samuel 10:18 the number is 700. 1 Chronicles 18:4 lists 7000 enemy horsemen captured by David, 2 Samuel 8:4 records 700 or 1700 horsemen depending on the vesion. In 1 Kings 4:26 Solomon is credited with 40,000 horse stalls but in 2 Chronicles 9:25 the number is 4000. Importantly, for believers in the Bible as the word of God, it should be noted that any copy or translation of the original manuscript is only inspired or inerrant in so far as it matches the original. When the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered in the late 1940’s, skeptics relished the thought of proving their pet theory that the Bible was so mangled by century after century of copying that it now bears little resemblance to the original. Among the scroll manuscripts were copies of books from the Old Testament, or Tanakh, that were more than 1000 years older than any previous copy we had. The skeptics were quite dismayed when they learned that while there were some differences, the differences were relatively few and usually involved minor changes in spelling. They did not change any significant biblical teaching. The integrity of the Bible’s text has been preserved like no other ancient document. This is quite remarkable, one could say “supernatural.” This verse shows no compelling evidence of copyist error and for much the same reasons as listed in point 1, we believe the scribes would take special care at this point and have recorded the correct number.

3) The 480-year figure is misunderstood. This thinking takes two main tracks. One is that the figure could be merely symbolic, because it uses round numbers and is figured by multiplying 40 by 12. One generation could be represented by 40 and 12 is considered a perfect number spiritually speaking. It would then only mean something like “after a full number of generations and in a good and perfect time.” This view is often used by scholars and archaeologists who want to date the Exodus to times vastly different than 1446 BC (usually earlier). This interpretation seems a little too convenient and since the verse lists the date down to the month of the year, it appears to be striving at precise accuracy. Although the period may indeed have spiritual and symbolic significance, the “merely symbolic” theory does seem to be a very satisfying explanation.

4) The 480-year figure is misinterpreted. A related theory that holds more weight than the one above, and that was held by most of the ancient Jewish and Christian writers, is the view that 480 is accurate but that it does not mean to include the times of oppressions listed in the book of Judges. This type of thinking has precedence in ancient Egypt and the Near East. For example, Egyptian king lists would omit those dynasties and reigns of kings that were foreign-born, since these were considered a national disgrace by the native Egyptians. Adding in the 111 years of oppressions during Judges would raise the 480-year figure to 591 years. The New Testament book of Acts might support this thinking. Acts 13:19-20 may indicate that the time of Judges alone was 450 years (to which would need to be added the other parts of the history to get to Solomon). The 450-year figure in Acts would correspond to the 111 years of oppression in Judges added to the 339 years of judgeship and peace. There is some textual uncertainty as to what period the “450 years” of this verse refers to (see different versions). Many modern commentators agree with the ancient writers that the Acts reference to 450 years pertained to the time of the Judges. If the Temple was begun in 966 BC this would result in an Exodus around 1557 BC.

What stories can the stones tell us?

5) The 480-year figure is accurate on its face. This is the most popular interpretation among conservative scholars. Many would say that while it is possible that the 480-year figure is misunderstood, it is best to stick with the reported number as is. To support this view, the figures in the book of Judges are said to not necessarily be meant as a cohesive timeline but rather might contain overlaps as one region of Israel had peace under a certain Judge while another region had an oppressor or a different judge. For example slavery under the Ammonites in the northeast at the same time as the incursion by the Philistines in the southwest.

It is clear that some of the stories in the book of Judges are not arranged in chronological order and not all the periods are accompanied by the phrase “and after this.” Overlap can be seen in Samson’s 20 years that were expressly “in the days of the Philistines” (Judges 15:11, 20). The 480-year figure (and thus a 1446 BC Exodus) is further bolstered by Judges 11:26 where Jephthah refers to the Israelites settling areas across the Jordan River just prior to the invasion and conquest of Canaan. He says this was 300 years prior to his time. Jephthah was one of the last judges of Israel to rule before Saul. He is normally dated around 1120 BC so if you add this 300 years to 40 years of wandering in the wilderness, you arrive at about 1460 BC for the date of the Exodus - not far from our 1446 BC date. Additionally, in the Talmud, the last two Jubilees are recorded which allows one to back-calculate to the first year of the first Jubilee cycle as 1406 BC, the year of the entry and conquest of Canaan (Young, “Solomon” 600-601).

So this seems to leave us with two possible candidates for the date of Exodus that enjoy both biblical and historical support. We favor the 1446 BC date but are also open to the period back to the mid 1500’s receiving increased examination. This seems to point to an early date for the Exodus. But during the last century a new wave of thinking swept biblical scholarship. Ignoring the above evidence for an early date for Exodus, most liberal academics now give the Exodus a late date in the mid 1200's BC, which has resulted in much of their skepticism. Why did this shift occur and what implications does this have for the search for the Exodus? We will examine the answers to those and other questions in our next post.

- Steve Law, Researcher for the Exodus Conspiracy

The Biblical Date for the Exodus - 1446 BC

2010-01-28T17:54:00.000-06:00

The timeline of the ancient world is central to an understanding of Exodus. It is crucial to answering such questions as, “Who was the pharaoh of the Exodus, when did Joseph and Jacob arrive in Egypt, and when did the Exodus take place?” Today, many scholars doubt the credibility of the Exodus account for the simple reason that they haven’t found any evidence that it ever happened. From the amount of evidence revealed in the film The Exodus Conspiracy, it is clear that several factors have been standing in the way of the experts finding and recognizing more evidence. One of those factors is that, because of wrong assumptions, archaeologists have been looking for the Exodus in the wrong time period. It all centers on the issue of dating.

If archaeologists are looking for evidence of an exodus that they believe happened around 1250 BC, then that is the period they will focus their search in. However, if the Exodus actually occurred about 200 years earlier in 1446 BC, then their search of the younger material will come up empty, since all the evidence connected to the actual event would be lying in an older and deeper layer of earth. The same is true of any written documentation found outside the Bible that might pertain to the biblical account. When the search comes up empty, doubts about the truth and accuracy of the Bible naturally arise. This type of scenario quite possibly affected scientific research during the last century or so.

So how can we determine an accurate date for the Exodus? If we are going to fairly test the biblical account, we need to start by seeing what information the Bible itself gives on this topic. Contributing to the challenge of dating the Exodus is the fact that, in ancient times, there was no absolute system for dating. There was no single point of reference that different nations or dynasties could relate to. Years were recorded based on the reigns of kings called regnal dates. In the following clip, Egyptologist, David Rohl helps explain some of these issues.

Although we have a good understanding of the dates for less ancient events, as we go further back in time than about the seventh century BC, our knowledge gets increasingly fuzzy. While the Bible does not give a definite date for the Exodus, it does offer clues that point to the true date. The most important verse for determining this, is 1 Kings 6:1 where it states, “And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel came out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord.”

The 1 Kings passage is significant because it references a time for the Exodus related to the building of the First Temple during Solomon’s reign and an unusually long but fixed timeframe of 480 years. If we could determine accurate dates for Solomon’s reign, then we would have our Exodus date.

Fortunately, the books of Kings and Chronicles give a comprehensive account of the kings who reigned in Judah’s capital of Jerusalem. This running list from the founding of the dynasty by Solomon’s father, David, to the final defeat of the nation and the destruction of the Temple, includes the length of their reigns and can be cross-checked with the reigns of the kings from the northern nation of Israel (the two nations separated after David and Solomon’s united monarchy). The date for the destruction of the Temple, the end of the line of kings and the exile of the Jewish people to Babylon is firmly established. Several contemporary and independent sources report the event, which occurred in 586 BC.

Starting with our known date of 586 BC, we can then work backwards through time using the lists of king’s reigns, adding up their years to find the dates for Solomon’s reign. While coming to a rough estimate of this may be simple math, arriving at a specific total is not, as there are various factors that complicate the process. These include instances of co-regency (when two kings share the throne for several years), differing customs of whether the year of ascendancy is called year-one or year-zero, and fractions of years within the whole numbers reported. The definitive work dealing with these issues is a book by Edwin Thiele titled, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings. Thiele concluded that the 40-year reign of Solomon was from about 970 - 930 BC. If all of his conclusions were correct, these figures would be accurate to within a year or so, and would put the fourth year of Solomon’s reign at about 966 BC.

This allows us to figure the biblical date for the Exodus. So starting with the known destruction of the temple in 586 BC and working backwards in time for the 380 years of kings’ reigns in Judah, we arrive at Solomon’s fourth year in about 966 BC. According to 1 Kings 6:1, the Exodus occurred 480 years prior to this, resulting in a date of 1446 BC.

This may seem solid enough but there are several challenges to the 1446 BC date on archaeological, historical and even biblical grounds. We will address these to see if any of them are valid in our next post.

- Steve Law, Researcher for The Exodus Conspiracy

The Ten Plagues: Part 2

2009-12-21T17:09:00.001-06:00

In our last post we began a discussion about the book of Exodus and the ten terrible plagues that struck Egypt. We looked at the account itself because to conduct a fair test of its historicity, one needs to determine the details of the account and then taking them at face value, go out to observe if the evidence supports or refutes the hypothesis that the account is accurate. This is how science is supposed to work.

Today’s focus will be on an often overlooked aspect of the plagues and the subsequent destruction of the Egyptian army at the Red Sea. Namely, the devastating and lasting impact they had on the power of Egypt. Egypt was the most powerful nation of the second millennium BC – the world’s first superpower. They often controlled the affairs of much of North Africa and Canaan with their influence extending even further. This great power being brought to its knees is a key factor in searching for evidence of the plagues themselves, as well as helping to know where to look for all evidence related to the Exodus. This is because it can help us narrow the possible dates for the Exodus – searching closely in those periods that match the account and eliminating from consideration those periods that do not.

There are many theories that date the Exodus in a very wide range of time. If the dates that some of those theories place the Exodus are significantly wrong, it can cause great problems in finding potential evidence. If you are looking for evidence at the wrong date (which equates to the wrong depth in the ground) you won’t find any and this will likely lead to false conclusions about the reliability of the Bible. This has often been the case and has led many to claim that no substantial evidence for the Exodus exists. Understanding the plagues properly can help pinpoint the actual date for Exodus and potentially lead to significant evidence that has been lying there, waiting to be found all this time.

One reason given for the plagues in the Bible is that they cleared the way for the Israelite’s conquest of the Promised Land. This clue is also crucial to our hunt for the Exodus. The plagues not only weakened the Egyptians to the point where they let the Israelites go; they were laid so low that they could not help their vassals and allies in Canaan repulse the Israelites during the conquest 40 years after the Exodus.

The Bible records Moses saying in Deuteronomy 11:4, that not only had the LORD done signs and wonders in punishing the Egyptians but that he had “destroyed them to this day.” Now this statement by Moses needs closer examination. It was given a full 40 years after the Israelites left Egypt, after their wandering period and when they were about to enter and conquer the Promised Land. What had happened to the ancient power of Egypt that had caused this lowly condition so long after the plagues? Just how bad were things in Egypt after the Exodus?

Let us consider more closely the disaster that happened to Egypt and its implications for Egypt’s future and the search for the Exodus.

Egypt – a Nation in Ruins

Psalms 78:44-55 also gives a revealing overview of the ravages experienced by the Egyptians. The text from Exodus reports in 7:21 that the fish in the Nile were killed and its water could not be used. This event alone would cause hardship since fish was a large part of their diet, and limited clean water would result in great thirst as well as less washing leading to greater instances of disease. This problem is seen in poorer nations without clean water today.

Exodus 8:24 states that the land was ruined by reason of swarming flies. These were not houseflies but possibly a kind of blowfly that inflict very painful bites. Blowflies not only eat carrion, they infest living tissue, laying their eggs in both humans and animals. The maggots then feed on the flesh of their host. They are known to spread salmonella, dysentery and many other diseases. Another plague decimated Egypt's cattle and herds. Its crops and trees were devastated by the plague of hail. Hail also killed non-Israelite slaves and much of the remaining livestock who were not brought into shelter. At this point Pharaoh’s own counselors said to him “do you not yet understand that Egypt is ruined?” (Ex. 10:7)

Video of Indian philosopher, Vishal Mangalwadi talking about the plagues

After this, the locusts ate all remaining plant-life taking the food from the people and animals. This may have also destroyed the late-sprouting wheat crop that had avoided the hail. Egypt was the breadbasket of the Mediterranean and to have their grain, livestock and fruit trees ruined would have put them in a position of severe famine.

Finally, the tenth plague killed all the firstborn male Egyptians who did not paint lamb’s blood over their doors. Any firstborn male livestock that remained also died. Firstborn men would have dominated all the important offices of authority, administration and organization in the land. After this plague, Exodus 12:33 says, “the Egyptians were urgent with the people, to send them out of the land in haste; for they said, ‘We are dead men.’” According to the biblical account, the Egyptians were in such a desperate situation they allowed the Israelites to strip them (and their nation) of their wealth - gold, silver and fine clothing.

Vishal Mangalwadi continues his commentary

Much of what was left of the Egyptian army was drowned in the Red Sea. This was not just 600 chariots. Exodus chapter 14 says that the force was 600 picked chariots but also included all the other chariots of Egypt along with horsemen and his army (see verses 7 and 9). Verse 28 states that all who followed the Israelites into the sea were destroyed. On that day, the nation of Egypt lost most of what was left of their army as well as the large slave labor force along with its multitudes of livestock, on which their economy had become dependent.

Egypt was in shambles across every area of society – agricultural, economical, military and government.

This would leave Egypt unable to bother Israel for quite some time. But how would the enemies of Egypt have reacted to such a state of affairs? It certainly would make the regions they had formerly dominated vulnerable to invasion. But even the Nile valley itself would have become a target. The ancient Near East was a region that experienced nearly constant conflict with the powers of the day vying for supremacy. With such a vacuum of power, it is likely that Egypt’s enemies would have walked right in and helped themselves to what was left of its wealth (especially in its tombs) and perhaps dominated Egypt’s political situation for some time.

With all this in mind, where should the search for Exodus evidence be taking place; in periods of slight dips in Egypt’s international influence or should we be looking in times of sudden and total collapse in Egyptian society due to the devastation of the plagues, the drowning of the army and the loss of their slave population?

Only a few periods show evidence of such a collapse, some even being attested to by Egyptian historians. These are the periods where our attention should be focused.

Could the devastation experienced by Egypt in the Exodus have caused them to even disappear from the international scene for several centuries? The Bible itself may hint that this was the case and that Egypt was brought lower than many have imagined.

Egypt was a prominent fixture in every period of Israelite history recorded in the Tanakh (the Old Testament) - except for one. They were a major player for the first 400 years, from Abraham through Moses (the biblically determined date for Exodus at the time of Moses being about 1446 BC). But then Egypt is not mentioned in the biblical account as being a factor during the conquest of Canaan or in the entire Judges period, a period that lasted about 400 years. This is true despite the fact that the book of Judges is a running record of the conflicts between the Israelites and their neighbors, recording both victories and defeats. It includes accounts of invasions by the Mesopotamians, Moabites, Philistines, Canaanites, Midianites and Ammonites but no mention of Egyptian invasions – in fact no mention of the Egypt in the present tense at all.

Even in 1 Samuel 27:8-12, at a time before David becomes king (around 1000 BC), his relatively small band of men raid and destroy Canaanite towns all the way to the border of Egypt with no fear of retribution from Egyptian forces. In fact, there is no hint of Egypt being a power again until the time of David’s son, Solomon, more than 480 years after the Exodus. After this point they quickly become a prominent subject and cause for concern again with numerous references throughout the remainder of the Old Testament and Israel’s monarchy, which lasted about 400 more years before ending in defeat and captivity in Babylon in 586 BC.

The fact that a strong Egypt was back on the scene is apparent in 1 Kings 3:1, where Solomon married an Egyptian princess and moved her to a house above Jerusalem. This evidently was for political gain with a powerful neighbor. 1 Kings 9:16 tells of Pharaoh taking the Canaanite city of Gezer as a present for his daughter, Solomon’s wife. According to the Bible, the strength of Israel reached its zenith during Solomon’s reign yet it is recorded that his son was defeated by an Egyptian conqueror in 1 Kings 14:25, as Shishak invaded Judah and plundered Jerusalem in the 5th year of Rehoboam. Egypt must have returned to full strength by this point.

So the Bible paints a picture of the Egyptian nation suffering severe devastation for at least 40 years after the Exodus. The affect of these events may have been a weak Egypt dominated by foreign powers for centuries. Understanding this reality is crucial for refuting a theory concerning the date of Exodus that has dominated academia for a century or more. This prevailing theory has caused many to search for the Exodus in the wrong period of history and the lack of evidence found there has caused many to dismiss the biblical account of Exodus.

Is this one reason why previously, so little evidence of the Exodus and conquest have been found? What might some of the other reasons be? As you will see in the film, looking for evidence in the right time period allows some spectacular finds to come to light. We will take up these points and others in our next posts.

- Steve Law, Researcher for The Exodus Conspiracy

The Ten Plagues: Part 1

2009-11-25T15:24:00.000-06:00

Today’s blog entry will be the first in a series of topical discussions about different aspects of the Exodus account and the investigation that seeks to test its validity as a historical document. These postings are intended to lay some common ground for issues addressed in The Exodus Conspiracy and stir up lively debate about these often-controversial subjects.

A better understanding of what the biblical account really says about these things is important to the investigation for the following reason. Multitudes of theories are put forward by academia, that try to explain more fully what the Bible is actually saying related to these events. Many of these theories become widely accepted as true. When evidence then begins to accumulate against the truth of some of these explanations, the tendency is for critics to dismiss the biblical account as fiction.

But what if a theory in question does not really match what the Bible is saying? In that case, what is being discredited is not the Bible itself but a different story that has been fabricated by someone. To fairly test the biblical account, one needs to determine the details of what the text is saying and what it is not saying as closely as possible. Then, taking the account at face value, go out and compare the account, point by point, with the available evidence to see if it is supported or not.

Khafre's pyramid on the Giza Plateau

This leads us to today’s focus, the first of two parts looking at the ten plagues. The account of the plagues brings up many questions such as: Why and how did they occur? Were they miraculous acts of God or are there natural explanations – perhaps even coincidence? Could any physical evidence of 3500-year-old plagues have survived until today? Is there any record from Egyptian sources about such events? How could their description help an investigation into the Exodus seek evidence that could support or deny the account? Today’s entry will look mainly at how and why the plagues occurred according to the source text in the Bible and how this might affect the search for evidence related to the account.

The Exodus text says that God spoke to Moses from a burning bush on Mt. Sinai. God had heard the cries of his people, the Israelites, who had become enslaved in Egypt. Now Moses was being sent on a mission to free them. Moses and his brother Aaron then confronted Pharaoh with a message from God saying, “Let my people go.”

Indian Philosopher, Vishal Mangalwadi sets up the confrontation that leads to the plagues
 
 When Pharaoh refused to release the Israelite people, a series of ten plagues or disasters came on Egypt. (Click on the verse links to view the passage.)

1. The Nile turned to blood Ex. 7:14-24
2. Frogs Ex. 7:25-8:15
3. Gnats/lice/mosquitoes Ex. 8:16-19
4. Flies/beasts Ex. 8:20-32
5. Plague killing the herds and flocks Ex. 9:1-7
6. Boils Ex. 9:8-12
7. Hail Ex. 9:13-35
8. Locusts Ex. 10:1-20
9. Complete darkness for three days Ex. 10:21-29
10. Death of first-born (both people and animals) Ex. 11:1-12:36

The biblical account lists many purposes for God bringing these plagues down on Egypt and destroying their army at the Red Sea crossing.

To make himself and his name known and glorified. Ex. 7:5, 17, Ex. 8:19, Ex. 9:14-16, Ex. 10:1-2, Ex. 14:4 , 18-19, Ex. 18:11
To give mercy to the Israelites by freeing them from slavery and ending their suffering. Ex.3:7-10, Ex. 6:5-6
To judge the Egyptians for wrongdoing. Ex. 6:6, Ex. 7:4, Gen. 15:14
To humble the Egyptians, especially Pharaoh. Ex. 9:17, Ex. 10:3
The slaying of Pharaoh’s first-born son was also retribution for pharaohs in the past ordering the killing of Israelite boys and oppressing the rest. Ex. 4:22-23
To enrich the Israelites and pay them back for their service to Egypt. Ex. 3:20-22, Ex. 12:35-36, Gen. 15:14
To execute judgment on the false gods of the Egyptians and show them to be powerless. Ex. 12:12
To show the Israelites that he heard them, that he had concern for them and that he was a great God who reached down and did great things for them in history. All in preparation and grounds for the Law and the covenant between them. Ex. 6:5-7, Ex. 14:14, Ex. 20:2-3 etc., Dt. 10:20-11:9
So that the Israelites can serve him in the way he wants. Ex. 8:1, 20
So that the Israelites would be strong and bold in their faith and obedience. Ex. 11:8, Ex. 14:14, 30-31
To display the fact that he shows favor to the Israelites and makes a distinction between his Chosen People and everyone else. Ex. 11:7
To show that he will fight for the Israelites. Ex. 14:14
To fulfill his promise of a nation and a land, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, after 400 years. Ex. 6:5 , 8, Gen. 15:13-14
To convince the Egyptians that they had to let the Israelites go. Ex. 3:19-20, Ex. 6:1, Ex. 11:1, Ex. 12:33, 39

   Vishal Mangalwadi comments on the plagues

Many try to explain the plagues as merely natural events that coincidentally happened to benefit the Israelites. However, according to the account, each plague happened by the Lord’s command and was preceded by a warning from Moses and left as soon as Moses asked for its removal. The first 3 plagues covered the entire land of Egypt and all suffered. But in the last 7 plagues, a distinction was made between the Egyptians and the Israelites in Goshen who were spared the suffering. When examining the nature of the plagues closely, these factors make them very hard to explain by merely natural causes.

In fact the term most often used in the text for these events is not plagues but rather “signs”. They were meant to call attention to the one who caused the sign. In Moses’ farewell speech, he says these signs were done in Egypt, “so that you might know that the LORD is God; there is no other.” (Dt. 4:34-35) So while natural elements were used, the clear claim of the biblical text is that the plagues were not merely natural and they certainly did not happen by coincidence. They were performed by God so that he would be known.

Pharaoh’s own magicians, who were not disposed to believing in the God of the Hebrews stated, “This is the finger of God.” (Ex. 8:19) Pharaoh continued to refuse the command saying, “Who is this god that I should listen to him?” (Ex. 5:2) According to the text, the God who wanted to be known, then went out of his way to answer Pharaoh’s question. We will explore the subject of miracles, science and faith in a later entry.

Vishal Mangaladi's commentary continues

If the account is taken at face value, then what evidence could one possibly find connected to these events to investigate their accuracy? The Nile returned to its normal state, washing the blood away. The hail melted, boils were healed and light returned. The fish, insects and other animals that were not buried would have quickly decayed as they do in nature today.

What if one found mass graves of the bones of ancient herds and flocks? We know from Genesis 47:6 that the pharaohs kept livestock in the Nile Delta and Exodus maintains that these were destroyed during the plagues. If many of these were quickly buried, then their bones may have survived to this day. Even if dated to the period of the Exodus, such graves by themselves would be far from proving the entirety of the biblical event. But if found, it could provide one piece of the puzzle that when assembled might support the validity of the Exodus account.

Similarly, the bones of people killed during the tenth plague might be found. Firstborn males may have amounted to 10-25% of the population at every level of society. This would have overwhelmed the nation’s ability to cope with proper burials and there could be evidence of large numbers of hastily performed, male burials from this time.

Does the earth in the Nile Delta hold buried evidence of the Exodus?
 
Have such finds ever been made? And what about the Egyptians themselves? Did such catastrophic events happening in their country go completely undocumented? Skeptics like to claim that not one scrap of evidence has ever been found connected to these events. Yet evidence is beginning to come to light. Evidence that may do more than just hint at the plagues, they might nail them down in a specific manner. Some of these amazing finds have been known for decades but not allowed to be connected to the Exodus. Others have only recently been discovered and may shed new light on this 3500-year-old mystery. But you will have to wait to see The Exodus Conspiracy for yourselves to judge how strongly they support the case for the Exodus.

Perhaps the aspect of the plagues that is most crucial to our search for all Exodus evidence is the cumulative effect they had on the mighty nation of Egypt. But that discussion will have to wait until our next posting.

- Steve Law, Researcher for The Exodus Conspiracy

Film Update

2009-04-07T15:34:00.001-05:00

In the past several weeks we have received many inquiries concerning the release of the film. We have delayed the release for two reasons. First, we are committed to making the strongest case possible in The Exodus Conspiracy since it has the potential to be the most powerful biblical investigation in history. After recent input from top scholars, we have decided to include additional archaeological evidence and several key interviews to fortify the investigation, preparing it to withstand the harshest criticism that is sure to come from those opposed to this story.

Secondly, we are continuing to meet with potential investors but are still looking for the right investors to align with this project, people who realize the importance of this film and want to support its promotion worldwide.

We anticipate the recent additions of interviews and evidence to be completed in the next months. We continue to move ahead with plans to release the film in Jerusalem and then in theaters around the world.

So I urge you to please hang in there. I am convinced that once you see the film, you will agree that it has been worth the wait. Because if it’s true, it changes everything.

– Tim Mahoney, Director of The Exodus Conspiracy

Netanyahu Israel’s New Prime Minister

2009-04-07T14:15:00.014-05:00

The fluidity of the issues and characters involved in The Exodus Conspiracy can be seen in the fact that when we interviewed Benjamin Netanyahu for the film, he was a former prime minister of Israel. Since March 31st, 2009 when he was sworn into office, he is currently the new prime minister. The film now includes both the sitting prime minister and president of Israel (Shimon Peres.) The themes in The Exodus Conspiracy do not just deal with a 3500-year-old story but they confront issues that lie at the heart of turmoil in modern-day religion, culture, philosophy and international relations.

Director, Tim Mahoney with Benjamin Netanyahu

Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu is the first Israeli prime minister born after the founding of the modern state of Israel in 1948. He was born in Tel Aviv but moved to the U.S.A. when he was 15 and went to high school near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He was previously the country's prime minister from June 1996 to July 1999 as well as the foreign minister (2002-2003) and finance minister (2003-2005.) Following Israel's parliamentary elections on February 10th, 2009, Netanyahu’s Likud party came in second place but right wing parties won a majority allowing Netanyahu to form a coalition government. What follows are portions of our interview with him from April of 2007.

TIM: When did you first hear about the story of the Exodus?

BN: With my mother’s milk I think. I mean every Jewish child absorbs that story and it’s a formative one. The stories in the Bible are the most powerful narrative stories ever told. It’s not a coincidence that this book has held the imagination of mankind for thousands of years, because the stories are remarkable. The story of Joseph and his brothers, the story of the Exodus from Egypt, the story of Moses and the tablets – they are just remarkable stories. They fire a child’s imagination. They certainly did fire my imagination from a very, very early age.

Joseph taken by slave-traders to Egypt as recreated in the film

TIM: In the Bible story, Joseph was hated by his brothers so much that they tried to kill him and they were going to throw him into a pit and eventually he got sold into slavery. But little did they realize that if they killed Joseph they would have been cutting their own throats.

BN: Well, it took them a while to discover that. The story of Joseph’s revelation to his brothers has got to be one of the most dramatic stories ever told. I read and re-read it periodically and it’s so powerful and so vivid and so detailed that you know that it happened.

Moses carved into facade of the Supreme Court building, Washington D.C.

TIM: Tell me about the affect the Exodus has had upon civilizations in the last 3,000 years.

BN: Moses was the greatest revolutionary of all time. Remember that in antiquity, there were grand empires that were based on one principle and that is slavery. And Moses challenged that twice. He challenged it by taking his people who were slaves in bondage in Egypt and freed them and took them to their Promised Land. But he also challenged it by providing a moral code for mankind that said that it is not the king or the emperor that decides the law, there is a higher law. And that higher law means respect for your fellow man and it also means that you have to be free. One of the reasons that Judaism didn’t make its way so rapidly and didn’t spread in the ancient world is that its premise, it’s conception, is that you have to be a free man and not a slave, to espouse Judaism. Now these were absolutely revolutionary ideas. And it’s the combination of the physical freedom; physically freeing the slaves from Egypt, but also ennobling them to a higher code of personal dignity, respect for your fellow man and personal freedom that was so at odds with the ancient world. And this shone a light and that light progressively expanded and reached larger and larger sections of humanity until it became the dominant code by which we live, or we at least aspire to live.

– Tim Mahoney, Director of The Exodus Conspiracy

The Lost Sea of the Exodus

2008-12-23T17:24:00.001-06:00

Dr. Glen Fritz has done pioneering work in locating the sea that the Israelites crossed during their exodus from Egypt. Known as Yam Suph in the ancient Hebrew manuscripts, the name of this sea was changed to Red Sea in the Septuagint, which was the first translation of the Tanakh or Old Testament into another language - Greek. The name Red Sea was retained in all subsequent translations and the original meaning and location of Yam Suph faded from memory, becoming one of the greatest mysteries of the Bible. Over the past centuries, the academic community has gravitated toward associating suph with the Egyptian word twfy or tjuf, which means papyrus. This led them to postulate the meaning of Yam Suph as sea of reeds rather than Red Sea and since the Red Sea did not contain papyrus, scholars have proposed crossing points at various reed lakes and marshes near the border of Egypt.

As a geographer, Dr. Fritz has used a unique approach to pinpoint Yam Suph in a region far from the traditional sites. In his recent book, The Lost Sea of the Exodus, Dr. Fritz puts forward the idea of a crossing at Nuweiba Beach on the coast of the Gulf of Aqaba and crossing over to ancient Midian located in present day northwest Saudi Arabia. Dr. Fritz has granted us a phone interview where we discussed his important findings. The following post contains segments from that interview with Exodus team member, Steve Law.

Dr. Glen A. Fritz, Author of The Lost Sea of the Exodus

SL: What flaws did you see in some of the traditional theories about the crossing site that led you to seek new answers?

GF: Well, I couldn’t justify the standard “reed sea” theory of a shallow swamp/lake meeting the description in the Bible of the disaster of the Egyptian army and that sort of thing. So I saw in the theories that there was an attempt to explain the Exodus sea-crossing, in particular, with naturalistic conditions, while in the Bible I could see it was written up specifically as a miraculous event of gigantic proportions. And so the scholarly theories that were popular – the reed sea theories along Egypt, again, all were dependant on the wind blowing in the right direction and shallow water and quicksand and naturalistic explanations. So I knew that that was very suspect and I also saw that so much of the exodus seemed to have taken place far away from Egypt and that the original theories had a very Egypt-centric focus and they didn’t take in the big picture of the Exodus. They focused on all of the things they could connect to the pharaohs and hieroglyphs and Egyptology and they basically ignored the rest of the exodus.

The Exodus Region

SL: As a geographer, what was your approach to trying to solve the problem of finding where this sea is?

GF: My approach was to dispense with all of the traditions and all of the commentaries and just to shut myself in with all of the geographical references in the Bible to Yam Suph. I tried to interpret everything I could find geographically that pertained to that sea, either during the exodus, before the exodus or after the exodus. And when I looked at the data as a geographer, I could see that that sea was analogous solely to the Gulf of Aqaba – near Edom and the southern extent of the Promised Land. After that observation, I realized that the Red Sea tradition near Egypt and the reed sea theories near Egypt did not match up to what the Bible was saying.

Director, Tim Mahoney and Lennart Moller at the Gulf of Aqaba

SL: What do you see as the best biblical evidence that points to Yam Suph being the Gulf of Aqaba?

GF: For me, the best verse is Exodus 23:31 that repeats the same boundaries for the Promised Land that were given to Abraham. This was a verse given to Moses and it uses Yam Suph to delineate the southern extent of the Promised Land - drawing a line from Yam Suph, which is the Gulf of Aqaba, to the sea of the Philistines, which would be the Mediterranean Sea. So this verse is important because it connects Yam Suph to the Promised Land and it also does not permit you to put Yam Suph in other locations and still have a boundary that would make any sense. The other verses in Scripture tie Yam Suph to Edom, which are the mountains of southwestern Jordan and there’s no way that you can tie any of the landmarks near Egypt with Edom. Also we have the key verse in Kings where Solomon built a fleet of ships at Elot, at Yam Suph, for commerce. And that’s a late conformation 400 years after the Exodus that Aqaba was still considered to be the location of Yam Suph.

The Red Sea According to the Chart of Agnese Battista, ca.1544. This map is typical of Red Sea representations prior to the 19th century. (Library of Congress)

SL: Why hasn’t Yam Suph as the Gulf of Aqaba been considered as a dominant theory in the past?

GF: It was not considered because the Gulf of Aqaba was not charted until the mid 1800s. And if you look at the historical geography of the region, you find that the Gulf of Aqaba was either completely missing from maps or misplaced and misrepresented on maps as late as the mid 1800s. So all of the early scholars throughout history, particularly in the Byzantine period when the original Red Sea/Mount Sinai traditions were formed, had no idea that there was another sea that would be in the line of the travel of the Hebrews. Of course the Greek Septuagint which was done, the work was done, in Alexandria, Egypt was a Egypt-centric, Hellenized version of the Bible. The geography that they used when they ascribed Yam Suph to being the Red Sea was based on the crude Greek knowledge of the day and that knowledge essentially did not change for almost 2000 years. So scholars were deprived of the knowledge of knowing of the Gulf of Aqaba really until the last century or two. And that’s when we see other people speculating that Yam Suph may have been at the Gulf of Aqaba. We start to see that with Charles Beke in the mid 1800s and of course that was after the charting was known of the Gulf of Aqaba.

- Steve Law, Researcher for Exodus Conspiracy

New Evidence of Temple Destruction

2008-11-14T14:23:00.007-06:00

Wow, I can’t believe it has been two months since our last post. I did not intend for that to happen. Let me share with you what has been going on recently. Since our last update, the Exodus Team has been in lock-down mode to incorporate the new footage shot during the recent trip to Israel. This required new themes to be woven through the entire script, revoicing segues, recutting scenes and fixing music. The result is a sharper and more powerful film.

While in Israel, I had a chance to interview Dr. Gabriel Barkay, an archeologist heading up the work of sifting through discarded material from the Temple Mount. This work has produced exciting new evidence that supports the history of the First and Second Temples. This information has dramatically changed the section of the film dealing with the covenant. During the Exodus, Moses foretold events concerning Israel and stated that in the future the Israelites would break the covenant they made with God and that this would cause them to be destroyed as a nation. This happened twice in the history of Israel, once during the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and a second time with the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. Now, for the first time, evidence of these events has been uncovered. The following is a portion of the interview with Dr. Barkay.

Dr. Gabriel Barkay during our interview.

TM: Tell me about the historical reality of the Temple Mount.

GB: Which period?

TM: Well, let’s start from the beginning.

GB: The Temple Mount is today stuck in the southeastern corner of the old city. If you look at the map of the old city you can see it is stuck in the corner. And from most parts of town you descend toward the temple mount. From the Jewish corner you go down and descend to it as the temple mount. From the Christian corner you go down, from the Muslim corner you go down, from the Mount of Olives you look down upon the Temple Mount. So the Temple Mount does not occupy the relative location that it occupied in antiquity. In Jerusalem, the ancient core of the city is south of the Temple Mount. Today, that area is outside the walls of the old city and for those people who lived there in the ancient core of town the Temple Mount was the Summit, it was the Acropolis, it was the crown on top of the head of Jerusalem. The city was lower than the Temple Mount and the ascent to the Temple Mount was felt in leg muscles, in breathing, in the blood pressure, and it was a steep climb up and to the old prophet Isaiah it could look the highest of all mountains. It was the high mountain. King Herod the Great, trying to compete with the Almighty, wherever he saw a flat terrain he built a mountain. That was Mount Herodian where he was buried, it’s an artificial mountain. In Jerusalem he saw a mountain, a dome-shaped hill, and made it into a flat terrain. So he changed the topography. He took a gigantic shoebox and put the dome-shaped hill into it. Between the walls of the shoebox and the natural slopes of the hill, he put artificial fill. So he more than doubled the terrain of the temple mount and made it into the largest religious enclosure of the world. The Temple Mount was the focus of activity in Jerusalem. It was the soul, heart, and spirit of the Jewish people. It was the central focal point of national identity and religious identity for the Jews both in the First Temple period and the Davidic Dynasty as well the Second Temple period in the time of the Persians, the Hellenistic Dynasties, as well as during the Hasmonean and Herodian Dynasties until the fall of the Temple in year 70 of the Common Era.

Here, archaeologists are examining and categorizing material sifted at the site.

TM: When the Romans destroyed the temple, how did they do it? Do you have any ideas of what happened?

GB: Yes, first of all we have an eyewitness who tells us. His name is Joseph, the son of Matthias the priest or Flavius Josephus. He was, in his youth, a priest at the temple. Later on he was one of the commanders for the first revolt against the Romans. Later he was captured by the Romans and he was in Jerusalem as an eyewitness to the destruction already on the Romans side. He surrendered to the Romans and with his shrewdness and his cunning character he was able to be adopted by the Roman emperors as an official historian. So he writes in Wars of the Jews. He writes a description and of course it is kind of apologetic, trying to beautify the Roman side. In any case, he tells us that it was by accident that one of the Roman soldiers threw a torch and the temple went on fire. I think it was on purpose that the Romans destroyed the temple. You can see that following that when Titus destroyed the city. Special effort was put in to the destruction, purposely done destruction of the city. There are very gigantic blocks of stone which built the framework around the Temple Mount built by Herod the Great, they were knocked down by crowbars and knocked down. That is why we have the Wailing Wall today because there was a large accumulation of stone at the foot of the western wall of the temple mount which preserved it. So the superstructure, the top part was knocked down so that is why we have the preservation of the lower part. You can see it actually with your own eyes. You can see the piles of stones on the Western Wall, which are still standing there.

– Tim Mahoney, Director of Exodus Conspiracy

The Answer to the Most Frequently Asked Question

2008-09-04T17:34:00.004-05:00

During the almost eight-year process of developing, editing and tweaking our film Exodus Conspiracy, we have been asked one question that continues to be asked, challenged and repeated mercilessly wherever the Exodus team goes. Personally, I’ve been asked this question hundreds, if not thousands of times in meetings, social gatherings and during film screenings. I’ve been asked by email, during phone calls, in church and during important business while in the men’s room. I’ve been asked by people of all ages, races, genders and religious affiliations in multiple countries.

It used to be that only people who have followed the progress of our film would ask this question. Now, I’m asked by people I’ve never met in places I’ve never been. I believe that there used to be a sign on my back that said “kick me” but there is now a sign that says “Ask him when the film is going to be released.”

So friends, I am going to attempt to answer the question that is above all questions. And, I’m going to try to help you all understand why the answer to this question has been so elusive. In fact, you may find this to be a call-to-action and you may have the ability to impact this important film in a very important way! Hey - YOU may be the answer to this question!

The Exodus Conspiracy has seen many changes over the years. What was once an investigation into the Red Sea crossing became much more. Just when we felt that the film was done, we would receive new information. We have actually “locked” the film four times in seven years! But, to our financial and emotional dismay we would learn that there was more to be disclosed – that the story wasn’t quite complete.

Most recently, we felt close to finishing the film late in 2006. Shortly thereafter, we met Dr. Kim whose information opened the conspiracy angle of the film. Then, Israel became a component and EVERYTHING CHANGED, including the title. Mixed emotions are part of the game in this business and we have had more than our share. But, the film continues to get more powerful, dynamic and intriguing.

Past film release estimates included spring, summer and fall of 2008. These estimates were based on our belief that the funds for marketing our film would be available six months prior to the release estimates. They’ve not yet materialized. The simple fact is that we cannot give a date for the film release until we have the funds needed to engage the marketing partners. Our release date is officially TBD. Perhaps you can answer this question for us. This is an important film, and we need a partner(s) to help us fund the marketing efforts. If you have significant means to help, we’d like to talk. Otherwise stay tuned and we will post the release date as soon as we know more.

-Pete Windahl, Co-Producer of Exodus Conspiracy

Photo 1: Pete, panning for coins to fund the film
Photo 2: Tim looking for buried treasure to fund the film
Photo 3: Jim and Penny trying to sell pelts for cash to fund the film
(click on a photo to make it larger)

Back From Israel

2008-08-28T18:11:00.002-05:00

The last month has been an exciting and busy time. After my last blog entry, Co-Producer Pete Windahl and I boarded a plane to Israel for a two week trip. This trip kept me from posting, but now that we are back, I want to share our excitement.

On this visit our primary focus was to interview top marketing and PR agencies, looking for the best team to manage the film's future worldwide release beginning with a Jerusalem premiere.

While in Israel, we were also able to film several more important interviews with archeologists. The first was with Dr. Jodi Magness, professor at the University of North Carolina, and author of several books on ancient Israel and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Here is a portion of my interview with Dr. Magness.

TIM: Where are we and what is the significance of this site?

JODI: Well we are at the site of Qumran which is located on the NW shore of the Dead Sea. And the significance of this site is that this is where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, those were 900 hundred ancient scrolls that were found in 11 caves around the site.

TIM: All through this area here?

JODI: That’s right!

TIM: And I know that the Exodus was documented in these scrolls.

JODI: Well that’s true in the sense that among the Dead Sea Scrolls are very early copies of the Hebrew bible dating as early as the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC. And Among these copies of the Hebrew bible are copies of the book of Exodus. So it shows that by the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC the stories of the Exodus was already considered an ancient tradition.

TIM: It’s been said that this is one of the greatest finds.

JODIE: That’s right. The Dead Sea Scrolls have actually been called the greatest archeological discovery of the twentieth century.

JODIE: In this cave there were over 500 manuscripts found which was the largest of all the finds.

Why, am I interested in the Dead Sea Scrolls? It has to do with events that Moses foretold about the future nation of Israel. It raises the questions, do these scrolls prove the prophetic words of the Bible, and do these ancient text's apply to the recent history of Israel? I can't wait to show you what has been uncovered concerning the Exodus, the Temple and the nation of Israel.

– Tim Mahoney, Director of the Exodus Conspiracy

Filming Recreations and Visual Effects

2008-07-31T11:01:00.001-05:00

NOTES FROM THE DIRECTOR:
One of the challenges in making a historical film is re-creating the events. Typically documentaries don't have the dramatic special effects scenes like the ones created for the Exodus Conspiracy. To tell the Exodus story, I really needed to show these events and I feel we have done a fantastic job with these recreations.

For a scene at Mt. Sinai, we used green screen to film actors playing the role of Israelites. It was here they made an everlasting covenant before G-d to be His people.

With the help of visual effects director Ben Pierre (Matrix, Lord of the Rings), we used these images to create the masses of people in front of the mountain.

We also re-created a scene of Moses splitting the rock at Horeb on the journey to Mt. Sinai. Here I am with Aaron played by our Co-producer Pete Windahl and Moses played by Jon DeVos.

Another important part of the film was recreating Jerusalem in ancient times. We took photography of modern Jerusalem to get the exact shape of the terrain and then re-created the Temple site using archaeological and biblical descriptions.

We also created the interior of the Temple. We needed this to re-create a scene of the High Priest entering the Holy of Holies complete with a replica of the ark of the covenant.

All of these scenes help tell the story of Exodus in a dramatic way and bring life to the evidence that has been found.

– Tim Mahoney, Director of the Exodus Conspiracy

If you want to see more on this aspect of the film, go to the Exodus Conspiracy website and open THE MAKING OF gallery. Page six of this gallery has photos related to this story.

Recording The Music

2008-07-24T18:49:00.002-05:00

NOTES FROM THE DIRECTOR:
Making a film is a very dynamic sensory journey. As a director you participate in all aspects of the story. One of the most emotional for me was the creation of the music. This is where you feel the film, you feel the story all the way back to Abraham, Moses and the parting of the sea. It starts with a conversation between myself and the composer about what a scene should say to the audience - what's the mood, the tempo and how will the music aid in telling the story.

The music in Exodus Conspiracy has done a wonderful job of assisting in the storytelling. Although this is a Jewish story, many of the areas under investigation are in Egypt and Arabia, so we added an Arabian feel to many of the musical themes. Yet we do have a very haunting Jewish melody that says, “Do not give up, no matter what comes.” The simple violin solo represented for me the triumph of spirit that doesn’t allow these people to quit.

The original soundtrack was recorded in Budapest, Hungary at Hungarian Radio Studio 22. The musical score was created by Jonathan David Neal of ScoreSmith Productions. Additional themes were composed by Rob Barrett of Third Street Music. Jonathan conducted the 75-member orchestra in a week-long recording session that also included a 60-voice choir, three ethnic musicians and a well known ethnic singer, Bea Talya.

Creative Direction was given by Bart Gavigan of Sparks Production London, England. Sound mixing was done by Los Angeles engineer, Tim Jacquette.

(Composer Jonathan David Neal, Engineer Tim Jaquette, Creative Director Bart Gavigan, Co-Producer Dan Herbeck)

I am excited to share this film with you and and the rich music that brings it to life.

– Tim Mahoney, Director of the Exodus Conspiracy

The Film's First Review

2008-07-18T12:21:00.018-05:00

NOTES FROM THE DIRECTOR:
This past weekend (July 12-13) an article was released by Rachel Neuwirth, a freelance journalist who recently saw the The Exodus Conspiracy. This article has been picked up around the world by various news agencies. You can google onto numerous blogs and read more. I am very pleased to see just how much interest there is concerning this story. We are receiving emails every day from people around the world asking when and where they can see the film. Momentum is growing.

– Tim Mahoney, Director of the Exodus Conspiracy

Director, Tim Mahoney filming in Israel

Director, Tim Mahoney in front of the menorah at the Knesset

Tim Mahoney and Co-Producer Pete Windahl preparing to film atop a building in Tel Aviv, Israel

“The Exodus Conspiracy”

Deniers of Ancient Israelite History Exposed

Rachel Neuwirth

I was privileged this week to preview, before its release to the public, what may well prove to be a masterpiece of the documentary film-making art—a new look at the Biblical story of the Exodus from Egypt in the light of contemporary archeology and politics in the Middle East.

Filmmaker Tim Mahoney’s The Exodus Conspiracy, due to be released within a few months, seeks to demonstrate the historical accuracy of the Biblical narrative of the exodus of the children of Israel from Egypt on the basis of recent archaeological discoveries and geographic explorations. A secondary thesis of the film is that the “Red Sea” crossed by the Israelites was the Gulf of Aquaba (called the Gulf of Eilat by modern-day Israelis), rather than “Sea of Reeds” in Egypt, as most Biblical scholars have always assumed, and that the true “Mount Sinai” or “Mount Horeb” of the Exodus narrative is in northern Saudi Arabia, and is not the Mt. Sinai shown to pilgrims and tourists over the centuries in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula.

At the same time, the film also documents the efforts of Arab governments, especially Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to suppress, or at least to seriously impede, the discovery and publication of archaeological data that would confirm the historicity of the Biblical narrative. Is this a conspiracy to suppress the truth about the ancient history of the Middle East? And if so, who could possibly want to deny the reality of a 3,500 year old event, and why? The film’s answer to these questions is that Arab governments and political circles wish to deny to the Jews the status of indigenous inhabitants of the Middle East; and above all, to deny the 3,000-plus years of continuous Jewish inhabitance of the Land of Israel (called “Palestine” by the Romans, the British, and now the Arabs). The entire Arab justification for 88 years of relentless war against the Jewish people in the Holy Land, and their efforts first to prevent the rebirth of the Jewish nation there, and then to destroy it, rests on the claim that the Jews are alien European “settlers” in the Holy Land, while the Arabs are the “indigenous” native population, who have lived there “since time immemorial.” Archeology that confirms the accuracy of the Biblical narrative, and which documents the ancientness of the Jewish habitation of the land, is thus extremely inconvenient to Israel’s enemies, even though (or rather because) it concerns events in the remote past.

While the archaeological- historical conclusions of The Exodus Conspiracy are controversial, a great deal of support for them can be found in On the Reliability of the Old Testament, a thoroughly documented and brilliantly presented study by Professor Kenneth A. Kitchen, a professor of archeology and Egyptology at Liverpool University in Britain. Also offering strong support for the historicity of the Israelite worship experience at the Biblical “mountain of God” is the work of Italian archaeologist Emmanuel Anati, who has explored a mountain in the Wilderness of Paran along the Israel-Egyptian border. At this site, Dr. Anati has discovered inscriptions, tools and other remains of worship ceremonies left by ancient Semitic nomads that bear a striking similarity both to those described in the Book of Exodus, and to those found by the explorers of a mountain in Arabia who present their findings in The Exodus Conspiracy. I do not pretend to know which mountain was the original of the Mt. Sinai or Mt. Horeb described in the Book of Exodus. Nevertheless, archeology certainly confirms that ancient Semitic nomadic peoples engaged in worship at the base of desert mountains that was very similar to that described in the Biblical narrative of the exodus.

However, Mr. Mahoney’s description of a major propaganda effort to deny the reality of the Jewish people’s three thousand-plus years’ residence in the Middle East is undeniably true. This effort is documented in numerous reports in the daily press, and in nearly every Arab book, pamphlet or website devoted to the Arab-Israel conflict. It is also documented by the writings of numerous “revisionist” historians and archaeologists, many of them Jewish and some Israeli, who support the Arab side in the Arab-Israel conflict. The attempt to deny the reality of the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt has even been joined by a well-known Los Angeles rabbi, David Wolpe. Indeed, Mr. Mahoney could have said much more than he has chosen to say about the non-Arab and non-governmental participants in this war against history.

Conspiracy supports its conclusions with interviews with a wide range of explorers, archaeologists, Biblical scholars, religious leaders, and even senior Israeli political leaders, such as President Shimon Peres and opposition leader Benyamin Netanyahu. It contains brilliant cinematography of ancient archaeological sites and the stark desert landscape in which they are situated, taken from original videos shot by the explorers of these sites. The documentary also contains recreations by actors of parts of the Biblical narrative of the origins of the Israelite people, clips from Cecil B. DeMille’s magnificent original 1920’s silent epic “The Ten Commandments,” and oral narrations of the Exodus story by distinguished “storytellers,” actually scholars and/or religious leaders of different faiths and from all parts of the world, dressed in their traditional national costumes. There are beautifully photographed scenes of present-day Jerusalem, and a truly shocking film clip of an Arab mob destroying Joseph’s Tomb, an ancient holy site sacred to three faiths, during the so-called “Intifada.” In short, there is something here for everyone; The Exodus Conspiracy has great educational value and is first-rate entertainment as well.

To bolster the case for the historicity of the exodus, Mahoney cites recent archaeological work in the region that was once called “the land of Goshen,” described in the Bible as the home of the Israelite people during their four hundred year sojourn in Egypt. These archaeological explorations have uncovered the presence of a substantial Semitic population there—which suddenly disappeared in the 13Th Dynasty of Egypt. This just happens to be the same era in which, many historians have surmised from surviving Egyptian historical records as well as references in the Biblical account, the Exodus must have taken place.

The people who lived in this region on the eastern edge of the Nile Delta, until their sudden and mysterious disappearance, kept sheep, which the Israelites raised and the Egyptians did not raise. The architectural style of their houses was characteristic of the Fertile Crescent region and different from that of contemporary Egyptian houses.

Most interestingly, perhaps, there is an elaborate tomb in this area of a high official of a Pharaoh’s government, which could easily be the tomb of the patriarch Joseph. Remnants of paint on a statue of the man even suggest that he wore a coat of many colors!

At around the same time and the same place, there is evidence of a sharp increase in deaths and mass graves have been found, as if victims of a plague were hastily buried without the usual funeral rites. Evidence of the slaying of the Egyptian first-born by the angel of death, as the Book of Exodus records?

Yet no archaeologist working in this region of Egypt has been willing to say publicly that he or she believes that the Semitic people who inhabited the Land of Goshen , and then mysteriously disappeared from it, were the Israelites. Why not? According to several scholars and archaeologists whom Mahoney interviewed, the answer is fear: the Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities, Dr. Zahi A. Hawass, decides personally which archaeologists will be allowed to work in Egypt, and he would never allow any archaeologist who expressed a belief in an ancient Israelite presence in the country to work there.

If there is subtle, quiet intimidation of archaeologists in Egypt, the intimidation of them in Saudi Arabia has been anything but subtle. Explorers convinced that the Biblical ‘mountain of God,” where He revealed the Law to the Israelites, is in northern Arabia, rather than in the Sinai Peninsula where post-Biblical tradition places it, have encountered fierce opposition from the Saudi authorities. One exploration party was subjected to 78 days of imprisonment. Several have encountered armed Saudi soldiers and police ordering them to evacuate the area immediately. Even the personal physician to a high-ranking Saudi prince, armed with a personal letter from the prince authorizing him to explore anywhere in Saudi Arabia, was denied entry to this area by armed guards. Why, Mahoney and his interviewees ask, is the Saudi government so intent on hiding ancient ruins and inscriptions?

One reason may be that the explorers have discovered a mountain on which are located the remains of religious altars, ancient Semitic inscriptions, and evidence of major encampments by nomads at the base of the mountain—all of which are elements, of course, of the Biblical narrative of the Revelation at Sinai. If the Exodus really took place in northern Saudi Arabia as Mr. Mahoney and his interviewees maintain, then the Arab claim to be the sole “indigenous” inhabitants even of the Arabian Peninsula itself, let alone “Palestine,” could be thrown into doubt.

Mahoney also places the obstructionist tactics of the Egyptian and Saudi governments within the broader context of the archaeological “front” of the Arab-Israeli conflict—a “front” that includes denials by Palestinian Arab religious and political leaders that there ever was a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, despite the overwhelming historical and archaeological evidence of the presence of two magnificent Jewish temples there over a 1,000-year period. As a part of their effort to cover up the ancient Jewish presence at the Temple Mount, the Muslim religious authorities who have been allowed to control the site by Israel have carted away and dumped tons of rich ancient soil containing archaeological remains of the two Temples. The shocking desecration and destruction of the tomb of the Biblical patriarch Joseph, who first led the Israelites to Egypt, by Palestinian Arab “militants” in Nablus (the Biblical Israelite city of Shechem) was yet another “action” in the archaeological- historical front of the war. It is as if the Palestinian Arab “militants” think that they can erase the ancient Jewish inhabitant of the land by destroying the surviving physical remains of that presence. The Arabs are waging a war against history itself in an effort to uphold their claims. The Israeli diplomat and scholar Dore Gold, author of The Fight for Jerusalem, in a brief on-camera interview in the film, lucidly summarizes the Jerusalem-Palestine “front” in the Arab war against Israelite-Jewish history. However, additional documentaries are needed to explore more fully this front of the propaganda-misinformation war against Israel and history.

While The Exodus Conspiracy is not the last word on this subject, and many additional documentaries about it should be made in the future, it is a must see for everyone who wants to understand the inseparable connection between the present-day conflict in the Middle East and the ancient events narrated in the Bible.

John Landau Contributed to this Article

Rachel Neuwirth, an internationally recognized, political commentator and analyst. She specializes in Middle Eastern Affairs with particular emphasis on Militant Islam and Israeli foreign policy. She has been published in prominent news papers of Europe, Asia and the US. She is frequently quoted by reputable Media. Conversant in Arabic and French.

Filming The Abraham Scene

2008-07-10T11:30:00.004-05:00

NOTES FROM THE DIRECTOR:
The story of the Exodus really began with Abraham the patriarch of Israel. According to the Bible, Abraham was told by G-d, “Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own, and they will be enslaved and mistreated four hundred years.” Genesis 15:13

The Bible states that G-d made a covenant with Abraham concerning his descendants and he fulfilled that covenant during the Exodus.

Before working on this film, I didn’t realize how much the Exodus story is woven into the fabric of the Bible. This event and the covenants that were created are the foundations on which all the books of the bible stand upon. These ideas seemed all the more real to me while shooting reenactments in the very locations they are said to have taken place.

Here we filmed scenes of Abraham and Isaac on the West Bank. I am demonstrating the scene when Abraham is told by G-d to sacrifice Isaac as an act of obedience. Dr. Moller is capturing the behind the scenes video.

You can read about the sacrifice of Isaac in the first book of the Bible Genesis chapter 22

Learning about these events can help each of us better understand the roots of these ancient conflicts now facing our world today.

– Tim Mahoney, Director of the Exodus Conspiracy