In part one, on the way to determining how far off standard Egyptian Chronology is, I pointed out 3 ways scientists and non-believers use time or Chronology to cast doubts on biblical time frames:

1. Scientist think the Biblical account is too young (e.g. age of the earth/universe) 2. Scientist can't find evidence of the event in the time period they think it happened (e.g. The Exodus) or 3. Scientists believe they have found evidence that disproves the Biblical time line (e.g. Biblical artifacts like the above Dendera Zodiak or the Egyptian pyramids.) 

In a docudrama titled Egypt's Greatest Mysteries - The Secrets Of the Hieroglyphs[1] about the work of Jean-François Champollion to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphs, the writers invoke challenge 3 from above, claiming Egyptian artifacts had been found that challenged the Biblical timeline. Artifacts mentioned are the below pictured Dendera Zodiac, now on display at the Louvre, and of  course the quintessential icons of Egypt - the pyramids, particularly the Great Pyramid at Giza (above).

The show challenged the Biblical time line by claiming artifacts such as the Dendera Zodiac or the pyramids might be older than the biblical flood - which would be impossible. Such items would not have survived the flood. But it appeared this show was gleefully stating these items were evidence that either the flood never happened, or it wasn't global. Neither of which are true of course. But it did get me to me to thinking how we could demonstrate they are mistaken in the assertion that such objects were older than the flood.

Clearly the standard Egyptian chronologies are off - since they are rendering dates for civilizations before the flood. The question is - how to demonstrate it? The best way it seemed to me would be to calibrate the date of a known Biblical event with a known Egyptian event - and see how far the dates vary.  As demonstrated in Part 1, the date of the Exodus is well known. If we could compare that with an Egyptian event - like the pharaoh of the exodus, we would be able to determine how much the standard dates given for Egyptian events - like the reign of certain pharaohs - varies from the known date of the Exodus.

Calibrating the error - How far off are the Egyptian time lines?

So to correct the erroneous dates given the Dendera Zodiac and other Egyptian artifacts that are dated too early we need to recalibrate the Egyptian Chronology. I am not the only one who has come to that conclusion, nor is the Biblical timeline the only chronology of an ancient people that disagrees with the Egyptian Chronology. In his documentary "Patterns of Evidence: The Exodus" documentary film maker Tim Mahoney points out that to get Egyptian Chronology - the underpinning for other ancient Chronologies - to line up with events in the timelines of other nations, it is necessary to insert gaps into the chronologies of nations of: the Hittites, Phoenicia, Syria, Greece, Nubia, Troy, and  Cyprus "... in order to match the dating of Egypt's third dark period."[2] Clearly the Egyptian chronology is off. Though it may vary the further back in time we go, we'll get a baseline of the difference by identifying the pharaoh of the Exodus, and comparing the date traditionally given his reign with the date of the Exodus we determined in part 1 of this article.

Identifying the Pharaoh of the Exodus

As noted in part 1,  the commonly assumed pharaoh - Rameses II - is not the pharaoh of the exodus - he reigned later. Mahoney in his documentary does not identify the pharaoh of the exodus, but the graphic he shows indicates the Egyptian chronology is off by at least 150 years. We'll use that as a starting point.

Documentary film maker Simcha Jacobovici attempts to identify the pharaoh of the Exodus in his documentary The Exodus Decoded.[3] He identifies pharaoh Ahmose I as the pharaoh of the Exodus for a number of reasons, the most memorable for me being that the name Ahmose could be a pun, a name play (and as we'll see in the next article puns are common in the Old Testament).  In Egyptian, the name means "the moon is born" but in Hebrew, Ahmose (אח משה) would translate to "the brother of Moses."[4] And if you've seen any of the Hollywood productions, you'll know the pharaoh of the Exodus is typically depicted as one who grew up with Moses from the time when the daughter of the Pharaoh adopted Moses to be her own. (Ex 2.10)

The traditional dates for Ahmose I reign are given as c. 1550-1525. Applying the correction of 150 years from above makes the actual reign circa 1400-1375  which would have been after the Exodus which as demonstrated previously occurred in 1446. Furthermore the standard history persuasively indicates that Ahmose I drove the Hyksos out of Egypt.  Jacobovici, following scholars Charles Pellegrino and Donald Redford holds to a theory that  the Hyksos are really the children of Israel, God's people who left Egypt during the Exodus. So you'd also have to buy into this theory and change the narrative - and say the driving out was really just an Egyptian propaganda story to cover the loss of their Israelite workforce or something like that to explain why we have accounts of Ahmose I driving out the Hyksos.

Mahoney's theory is more feasible. In that scenario the Hyksos were able to take control over Egypt once the Israelites departed because Egypt - including her army - were destroyed (Ex 14.28) , and thus the Hyksos, the "shepherd kings"[5] were able to come in and take over "without striking a blow" as David Rohl puts it.[6] That both 1) requires no departure from the commonly accepted history that the Hyksos are indeed a foreign nation (not the Israelites) who took control over parts of Egypt. And more importantly 2) it  also makes practical sense: any time there is a vacuum of power, some other power will move in to fill it. (Matt 12.43-45). This appears to be what the Hyksos did as the power of Egypt crumbled as a result of the plagues of the Exodus which cost Egypt her army and her might.

So Ahmose I is not the pharaoh of the Exodus either. How then will we identify him? We'll use Mahoney's technique of looking for patterns of evidence, and take the advise of Egyptologist David Rohl on how to find him. Due to the judgments God brought on Egypt to bring about the Exodus, Egypt  had suffered the loss of her crops, her first born males (of all ages), a large portion of her livestock, her entire army (Ex 14.28)  and the Egyptian work force - Israelite slaves.  Egypt was ruined. (Ex 10.7) Thus Rohl states:

"You look for a collapse of Egyptian society, and that's where you'll find the exodus and Moses."[7]

But there are other clues as well. Here's the pattern of evidence or clues we'll be looking for to identify the pharaoh of the Exodus:

• A Pharaoh reigning during the collapse of Egyptian society
• This pharaoh reigned before Ahmose I (before the Hyksos invasion)
• The Pharaoh who raised Moses would have died before Moses confronted the Pharaoh of the Exodus (Ex 2.23)
• 40 Year Gap - Moses was 80 when he confronted Pharaoh (Ex 7.7), and 40 when he was driven out of Egypt (Acts 7.23-30)
  So there was a 40 year period between when Moses grew  up and fled; and another 40 years between when Moses had fled Egypt and returned to confront the pharaoh.  Also the Pharaoh from whom Moses fled died before the exodus (Ex 2.23), thus the pharaoh of the Exodus is different from the pharaoh from whom Moses fled.
• Unexpected deaths of first born males should be recorded at the time of the exodus during the reign of the pharaoh of the exodus due to the plague on the first born (Ex 11.5)
• The Hyksos would have overrun Egypt shortly after the reign of the pharaoh of the exodus since Egypt was defenseless after the exodus. So there should be accounts of growing problems with the Hyksos following the pharaoh of the Exodus.

There's one Pharaoh that meets all of these criteria: pharaoh Merneferre Ay. As we look at the patterns of evidence, the above clues we see he's an exact match, a precise fit. For the background details and references for these assertions, see this reference diagram which charts out the details and lists supporting references.

Merneferre Ay: The Pharaoh of the Exodus
The patterns of evidence:

- Reigned during a collapse of Egypt:
Merneferre Ay clearly reigned during a collapse of Egypt:
"Merneferre Ay is the last pharaoh of the 13th dynasty to be attested outside Upper Egypt and in spite of his long reign the number of artifacts attributable to him is comparatively small. This may point to problems in Egypt at the time and indeed, by the end of his reign, 'the administration [of the Egyptian state] seems to have completely collapsed.'"[8] Also "by the end of Ay's reign the 13th dynasty had lost control of Lower Egypt including the Delta region."[9] And thus he is the last Pharaoh to be attested as ruling of both north and south Egypt.[10]

- Reigned before Ahmose I
Merneferre Ay is part of the thirteenth Egyptian dynasty which comes long before the 18th dynasty, of which Ahmose is part of.

- Timing of The Pharaoh who raised Moses -
died before the Exodus
Egyptologist David Rohl identifies Sobekhotep IV as the pharaoh who raised Moses. This leads one writer to conclude that he is both the pharaoh in whose house Moses was raised, and the pharaoh of the Exodus:

"According to the New Chronology proposed by David Rohl, Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV was the Khenophres mentioned by Artapanus, under whose reign Egypt suffered plagues and the increase of 'foreigners. According to this revision, this would have been the Pharaoh who raised Moses as a prince of Egypt."[11]

But due to his long life (120 years Ex 34.7), Moses saw many pharaohs come and go and the pharaoh who raised Moses died before the confrontation of the exodus.   According to the timeline I'm proposing, the pharaoh in whose house Moses was raised is different from the pharaoh who sought his death, who is different from the pharaoh Moses confronted with God's command, "Let my people go!" (Ex 5.1, 7.16 et. al.)  This finally makes sense of why the pharaoh who sought to kill Moses after he learned Moses had killed an Egyptian. (Ex 2.14-15) It had never made sense to me that a King - who has the power of life and death over all - would choose to kill his son - albeit a step son - even though the charge is something serious like manslaughter. Why not select some other punishment like banishment to some forgotten region, or find a scapegoat as is sometimes done? Why choose death for  your son? 

But once you consider the pharaoh who sought to kill Moses was not the pharaoh in whose house Moses grew up in, and probably wasn't particularly close to or fond of Moses, then it makes sense. To the pharaoh who ordered his death, Moses is not a "prince of Egypt", he's just another Hebrew to be brought to justice. In my reconstruction of the chronology,  the Pharaoh who raised Moses was Kendjer - who had a short reign - only 5 years - so he died while Moses was still a child. As for the pharaoh who orders his death - Soberkhotep IV - he dies shortly after Moses flees to Median. (Ex 2.23)

- 40 Year Gap between Pharaohs
Scripture indicates there's a 40 year Gap between the pharaoh who sought  Moses death and the pharaoh of the Exodus, whom Moses told, "thus says the Lord: 'Let my people go!'" You can view that chronology here.

- Unexpected death of the First born during Ay's reign
While I have yet to find a record of the death of Ay's first born, there is an ancient deed that records the untimely death of the first born male of his daughter, the princess Reditenes.  It's not surprising that an Egyptian pharaoh would choose not to record for all posterity the death of his first born at the hands of the the Hebrew God, a death the pagan gods of Egypt could not prevent.  It's also not surprising that multiple members of a household would be affected by the plague on the firstborn. Consider the current royals of the United Kingdom. While I wish them no harm (God save the Queen, - and future king!) if a plague on the first born male were to strike them today as of this writing, it would claim a victim in 3 generations.[12]

In the case of Pharaoh Ay, we see a victim in the 2nd generation (after the pharaoh) for which we have a few details: To keep a Governorship in the family a former governor (named Aya) who had been promoted to vizier records a document moving the governorship from his unexpectedly deceased firstborn son whom he had with the princess, the daughter of Pharaoh Ay to his next son Ayameru. The deceased, (another Aya - typically differentiated as Ay Jr.) was the firstborn of the vizier and his wife the princess. Since they wanted the transfer of the governorship  to be official, we have a record, an official document of the then existing Egyptian government of the untimely death of the first born son of the princess, daughter of Pharaoh Ay.[13]

- Egypt overrun by the Hyksos after the Pharaoh's reign
History records that the Hyksos began to overrun Egypt during the governorships of the son (Ayameru) and grandson (Kebsi) of the princess Reditenes, daughter of the pharaoh of the Exodus. This places the assault on Egypt by the Hyksos shortly after the reign of  Merneferre Ay - as expected. Again, the support for these assertions can be found in this resource diagram.

Assessment
All the pieces fit. All the circumstances, sequence of events and number of years between key events fit pharaoh Merneferre Ay perfectly. Now that we've identified the Pharaoh of the Exodus we can calculate how far off traditional Egyptian Chronology is from the actual date.

Correcting Egyptian Chronology

From the reference diagram we can see that:

In the year of the exodus (1446 B.C.)  Moses was 80.
That was three years prior to the final year of Ay's reign.
So the exodus happened in the final year of Ay's reign minus 3 = 1674 by traditional Egyptian dates.

1674 - 1446 give us 228 as the variance between the date of the Exodus,  which we are sure of; and Egyptian chronology - of which the only thing we're sure is that it has gaps. So at the time of the exodus, the gap between traditional Egyptian chronology and the actual date  is about 228 years. (The gap may widen in earlier periods.)

Now that we know how far standard Egyptian chronology is off from the actual date, we can make corrections to other estimated Egyptian dates. In the docudrama that started me thinking about the dates of Egyptian artifacts[14], the date of the great pyramid at Giza is estimated to have been built is given as around 2560 B.C. and it took (it is believed) around 20 years to build. Applying the correction we get:

   2560 standard estimated date for Pyramids
-   228  calculated variance
 2332 = Pyramid date corrected for the variance

We can now compare it to the year of the flood:

    2349 Year of Flood
-  2332 Year of the Pyramid
        17   =    Number of years to build Great pyramid after flood

So once we account for errors made in Egyptian chronology we see the pyramids were indeed constructed after the flood. Remember these are all estimated dates,  and we don't know how long the pyramids took to be built, but it appears (within a margin of error) there was sufficient time after the flood - particularly if the estimate of the pyramid's age is high - as I suspect. If that's the case they likely didn't begin building pyramids until dozens of years after the flood [15] and the date of the pyramid should be moved further down - after the flood.

As for the Dendera Zodiak, the aforementioned docudrama indicates some in the day of Jean-François Champollion (19th century) thought it might be so old it predated the flood (which of course is impossible).  Champollion was charged with using his knowledge of Egyptian hieroglyphs to determine the truth about its age. So as not to ruffle feathers the show indicates he chose to keep the date to himself until his death. Whether that's true or not I'm don't know, but current sources indicate that "Champollion deciphered the names of Tiberius, Claudius, Nero and Domitian on the ceiling of Dendera's temple, and placed the zodiac in the era of Roman rule over Egypt"[16] which places it around the 4th - 7th century AD - or about 3 millennia after the flood.

Thus the Egyptian chronology conundrum has been resolved. There is no conflict, and the Bible is proved right again. In the next article we'll look at a challenge to the date that the Bible indicates the Tower of Babel was constructed.

Epilogue: Remaining Questions
Question 1: How did so many scholars miss the pharaoh of the exodus?
I'm sure many are wondering how so many scholars and Egyptologists missed the proper identification of the pharaoh of the exodus. A great many scholars (most I would say) missed the pharaoh because instead of following the "patterns of evidence" as Mahoney calls it, they followed traditional Egyptian dating, which as demonstrated here is off. That led them to the wrong century, and thus the wrong pharaoh.

Film maker Simcha Jacobovici though in the correct century, missed it because he mis-identified the Hyksos as the children of Israel instead of who they were: opportunistic foreign invaders who took advantage of Egypt at her moment of weakness after God "smote" Egypt. ("Smote" is the word Manetho uses in Rohl's translation of Josephus' recount of Manetho's description of the exodus events.)  That mis-identification led him to miss the date, the pharaoh, and the impact on Egypt of the Exodus (namely the weakening of Egypt leading to the invasion of the Hyksos).

Egyptologist David Rohl agrees the standard Egyptian timeline is incorrect, and in fact has proposed his own corrected Egyptian timeline. Thus he had the best chance of correctly identifying the pharaoh of the exodus, but he also missed the pharaoh of the exodus because he made a critical mis-step in his identification. In his presentation on his identification of the pharaoh, Rohl quotes Josephus, who is quoting the Egyptian priest Manetho who is giving a history of Egypt.  Rohl renders the quote as "Tutimaeus, in his reign, for what cause I know not, a blast of God smote us (i.e. the Egyptians)."[17] 

Based on the text of Josephus, "Tutimaeus"  is unexpected as the name, so I wonder if that's his own translation or some translation other than the popularly used translation of Josephus. Regardless, though I don't have the original Greek manuscript of Josephus,  the popular translation by William Whiston[18] indicates the name of the Pharaoh as "Timaus" - not Tutimaeus. However Rohl identifies it as Tutimaeus which leads him to conclude, "Remember he [Manetho] is writing in Greek, Tutimaeus is Dudimose."[19] And thus using the Royal Canon of Turin, he identifies Tutimaeus with the pharaoh Dudimose -  the pharaoh who reigned about 45 years after Sobekhotep IV ( and Soberkhotep IV he believes is the pharaoh in whose house Moses was raised). Thus he mis-identifies Dudimose as the pharaoh of the exodus.

Rohl misses a key point.  The key is in the explanation Josephus gives of the work that Manetho produced:

"But Manetho was a man who was by birth an Egyptian; yet had he[sic] made himself master of the Greek learning, as is very evident, for he wrote the history of his own country in the Greek tongue, by translating it, as he saith himself, out of their sacred records..."[20]
Josephus, "Against Apion" 1.14.73

So what is Manetho doing? He's translating from Egyptian sacred texts into Greek. But it looks like Rohl sees the name not as a translation, but as a transliteration. A transliteration is when you merely substitute letter for letter without translating the meaning. For example, Luke writes his works (both Luke and Acts) to "Theophilus" (Luke 1.3; Acts 1.1)  Theophilus is a transliteration of the Greek word, Θεοφιλος, with the letters we use in the English alphabet substituted for the Greek ones that convey the same sound. That's transliteration. But if you translate it - it looks like two words: Θεος (God) and φιλος (friend) - so together "friend of God." So who is Luke writing to? A person named "Theophilos," or is he writing to all "friends of God?" That's a discussion for another time. The point here is that Rohl missed that he should be translating not transliterating.

Confirmation of the Caldwell Conclusion

The pharaoh of the Exodus is named by Manetho as "Timaus."  That's clearly a Greek name, not Egyptian, and looks like the Greek Τιμιος  (Timios) - which means "of Great worth or value."  What is the Egyptian word for "Great worth or value"? Fortunately there's an English to Egyptian dictionary online[21] . Look at the word for "great", and you find: aAi: Very close to the king's name, which has been rendered Ay, Aya, Iy etc. but which likely all sound like "Ay" or "Ai".  So clearly what Manetho has done is translate  from Egyptian to Greek the idea of "Greatness", and gave us a Greek translation for that concept as the name of the Pharaoh of the Exodus - not a transliteration. Thus "Timaus" cognate "Timios" in Greek means approximately the same as the Egyptian "Ay" - one who is great - that is, of great value.

Thus we have a final piece of evidence that confirms and cements the case for Pharaoh Ay being the pharaoh of the Exodus: He's named by the Egyptian historian and priest Manetho who relates what's recorded in Egyptian sacred texts, which is then retold by the Jewish historian Josephus. How much clearer can you get than being given the name of the pharaoh of the Exodus by an Egyptian historian writing a history of Egypt, who identifies the reigning Egyptian king during what is clearly described as the events of, and immediately following the Exodus?

Question 2. What about Dates beyond the 228 year gap at the time of the exodus?

Some Egyptologists, scientists and historians claim dates that are even older than the pyramids. Some will claim dates for civilizations going back to 5,000; 10,000; even 20,000 B.C. Dates older than the age of the earth are obviously impossible. Biblically speaking that would be anything older than about 6000 years.  Nor do we expect to find evidence of civilizations from before the flood. (i.e. before 2349 B.C.)

For those who claim such dates, I would simply ask, what evidence is there that's a real date, and not just someone's biased or made up date based on a Bible denying worldview? What concrete evidence can they adduce? Can they, for example, to prove their supposed ancient date, calibrate their suggested dates to a known event as I've done here with the exodus and the pharaoh of the exodus? For dates beyond the flood the answer is no, they can't. Nor can they claim any age as "measured" because as I pointed out in part 1, age - the amount of time passed - is not a quantity you can measure directly after the fact - not even with radiometric dating techniques.  [22]

Assertions of ancient ages for previous civilizations are similar to assertions of an ancient universe. Based on the evidence, the universe is young. Suggestions it is billions of years old are based not on evidence, but on a world view that requires billions of years for its godless theories to look feasible and not be laughable. (Though they still are.) In these theories man - homo sapiens - supposedly evolved from some common ancestor about 200,000 years ago, and thus they conclude there must be evidence of civilizations from tens of thousands of years ago. But what evidence do they have of any civilization at that time?  In a popular and widely spread prop for evolution they draw the famous icon - the sequential picture of an ape looking more and more human. But such pictures are merely an artist's depiction. There is no evidence of large scale macro evolution from ape to man.  Fossils show either apes, or humans.  Nothing in between. The only "missing links" have been mistakes and hoaxes.

Likewise artwork that depicts various ages going back tens of thousands of years is merely another icon meant to persuade. But like the icon of evolution, there is no evidence for dates of civilizations beyond the flood. I saw an icon recently, a depiction in a documentary on Egypt[23] that aligned ages for ancient civilizations going back to 21,860 BCE with periods they divided up and named after signs in the zodiac. The second to last age they depict - named the "age of Sagittarius" dates supposedly back to 19,700 BCE. And what was happening during that period? According to icon, the "first known alphabet" at about 18,000 BCE.

If alphabets started with the Egyptians as some suggest [24],  then as already demonstrated: first, those dates are off and second, the dates for Egypt are nonetheless relatively recent - thousand of years ago, not tens of thousands. So suggestions that alphabets are tens of thousand of years old are obviously wrong not only to the biblical world view, but to standard secular history as well. 

Finally, keep in mind: artifacts don't come with little tags with dates of origin. (Neither do fossils or galaxies for that matter.) So pictures of items with ancient dates with large numbers representing old ages (like the icon of ancient civilizations mentioned above with ages named after the zodiac ) are not evidence, they are art. You have to do more than draw a pretty picture and label it with ancient ages to be persuasive about ages. You have to ask a few questions and do a bit of digging to calibrate alleged dates in artwork with real dates and events - and see if they actually match up.

Duane Caldwell | January 31, 2018
Follow @duanecaldwell
 

Notes  

1. "Egypt's Greatest Mysteries" episode  The Secrets Of the Hieroglyphs,  BBC / TLC Documentary / Docudrama, Discovery Communications 2017
Back

2. Tim Mahoney, Patterns of Evidence: The Exodus,  Documentary 2014
Back

3. The Exodus Decoded, Directed by Simcha Jacobovici, Introduced and Narrated by James Cameron, Documentary, 2006
Back

4. The name "Moses" is itself of course, also a word play on the Hebrew word that means "to draw". (Ex 2.10)
Back

5. Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus indicates that the word "Hyc" means king in the "sacred dialect" and "sos" means shepherd in the  "ordinary dialect" and thus "Hycsos" is a compound word. Which would mean they were Asiatic - from the same area as the Israelites. He also notes some say "that these people are Arabians", and others say the word means "Captive Shepherds."
Flavius Josephus, Against Apion, Book 1, 14(81);
Translated by William Whiston for "The Works of Josephus, Complete and Unabrdged", Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers 1987, p. 778; Kindle Edition Loc 30950
Back

6. David Rohl, ref. from Patterns of Evidence (quoting some translation of Josephus' account of the Hyksos take over.)
Back

7.  David Rohl, ref. from Patterns of Evidence
Back

8. K.S.B. Ryholt: "The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period, c.1800–1550 BC", Carsten Niebuhr Institute Publications, vol. 20. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 1997
and
Thomas Schneider in: "Ancient Egyptian Chronology" - Edited by Erik Hornung, Rolf Krauss, and David A. Warburton, see p. 181, 497
both ref. from "Merneferre Ay"    Wikipedia, accessed 1/5/2018,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneferre_Ay
Back

9. Christopher Eyre, "The Use of Documents in Pharaonic Egypt", Oxford University press, p152
Back

10. Thirteenth Dynasty of Egypt, Everipedia, accessed 1/13/18, https://everipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Dynasty_of_Egypt/
Back

11.  "Thirteenth Dynasty of Egypt", entry: Sobekhotep IV, Crystal Links, accessed 1/5/18, http://www.crystalinks.com/dynasty13.html
Back

12.The 3 generations would of course be Princes Charles, William and George. While prince Philip, the husband of the queen is the only (and thus eldest) son of his parents, he is not the firstborn and thus would likely have been passed over for the biblical plague. Had he been the firstborn, one can easily see how the plague could affect 4 generations.
Back

13. The official document is referenced here:
Christopher Eyre, "The Use of Documents in Pharaonic Egypt", Oxford University press, p. 152
Back

14. "Egypt's Greatest Mysteries" episode  The Secrets Of the Hieroglyphs,  BBC / TLC Documentary / Docudrama, Discovery Communications 2017
Back

15. Pyramids are found all over the world from China to Italy to Mexico, and many exhibit similar design features, though the cultures are thousands of miles apart. This suggests a scenario as depicted in Genesis 11.1 - where the world had one common speech - and a common knowledge base - including how to build pyramids. After the languages were confused and the people groups split up and gathered together by common language, it appears they again began building tall structures - pyramids within their own people group.  This scenario would require time - for the people to separate, setup their own cultures, and again begin building pyramids. So it's unlikely people began building pyramids in the diverse locations immediately after Noah and his family departed from the ark - when they still had "a common speech."
Back

16. "Dendora Temple Complex", Crystal Links, accessed 1/11/18, http://www.crystalinks.com/DenderaTempleComplex.html
Back

17.  Lecture, David Rohl, "The First & Last Exodus - On Our Way to the Promised Land...once again"
Posted on YouTube as "The Biblical Exodus...Fairytale or Historical Fact by David Rohl"
Published Aug 15, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEm-ovpMM5c
Back

18. William Whiston, "The Works of Josephus Complete and Unabridged", Peabody, MA:Hendrickson Publishers, 1987, p. 778 (Against Apion, 1.14.74)
Back

19. Rohl, (Lecture) "The First & Last Exodus", about 2:00:00 - 2:00:20
Back

20. Whiston, Josephus, p. 778
Back

21. English to Egyptian dictionary, accessed 1/21/18,
http://karathutmose.tripod.com/dictionary/dictionary2.html#G
Back

22.  For the many ways Radiometric dating can be erroneous, see my article, Radiometric Dating: Science or Guesswork?,  http://rationalfaith.com/2016/10/radiometric-dating-science-or-guesswork/
Back

23. The Pyramid Code episode 1: "The Band of Peace", documentary produced by Carmen Boulter, 2009
Back

24. For instance: Ancient History Encyclopedia, "Alphabet", accessed 1/28/18, https://www.ancient.eu/alphabet/
Back

Images

Dendera Zodiak At the Louvre by Sebi, released to Public Domain
Egyptian pyramids - Egypt Travel ©  Ahmed | Fotolia, Used by Permission