HOME | PROFILES | SNAPSHOTS | CONTACT US
Escape From Planet Egypt
Prophecy students that have been paying close attention to the prophetic 'signs of the times' will have long ago noticed how Egypt continually resurfaces as a 'type' and simile of the world. For many years, Christian pastors have preached sermons that point out the fact that, throughout scripture, Egypt symbolizes the world.
As prophecy writer Wilbur Smith put it back in 1957, "Egypt represents the world and the pull of the world, a magnetism from which Israel was never fully loosened," 1. Just like the ancient Hebrews that were delivered from the bondage of slavery, the scriptures repeatedly instruct us to come out of Egypt so that we may passover to the promised land.
In this context, Egypt is also a type of sin and of the world system. The Egyptian handmaiden Hagar was, for example, the 'mother of disbelief' as she bore Ishmael to Abraham when he doubted God's promise to give him a son through Sara.
The Egyptian pretender to the throne of the world, the Pharaoh, was the chief oppressor of God's covenant people in the Old Testament. The Egyptian priests sought to counterfeit the miracles of God manifested in Moses at the deliverance of his people.
But do the analogies end here? Or are there even deeper mysteries and clues to the final days that have been obscured by the ages? I contend that Egypt provides another primary key in unlocking an understanding of the times of the end. My research shows that the analogies continue far beyond a simple characterization of saved versus unsaved. They show that Egypt is more specifically the type of the world during the last days. To study Egypt is to seek to unravel the history of the deception of planet Earth, for the great civilization on the banks of the Nile is central to understanding how the Devil has deceived the nations. Apostate religion and the so-called New Age theological precepts were all derived from Egypt. The attempted corruption of the Bible through the infiltration of faulty translations and manuscripts originated in Egypt. The prophecies of world history and political dominion in the books of Daniel and Revelation all take us back to Egypt as the first kingdom with a throne that dominated the known world.
Egypt is in a class all by herself in the study of archaeology and ancient civilizations. As we shall soon see, I believe that the entire premise of history is founded on a series of false interpretations of early Egyptian historical accounts. These distortions in our modern understanding of the scholarly accounts of ancient times have enabled Satan to obscure the truth about God and his Word - and Egypt is the tool the Devil has used in his attack on the Word of God.
The foundation of all ancient historical understanding is based on two seemingly different historical streams of information. The first is found largely in the Old Testament, and other extra-biblical Jewish commentaries and writings. These are, obviously, written from the perspective of the ancient Israelites. The other historical body of information is from the perspective of the ancient Egyptians. The Egyptian accounts are widely dispersed through ancient lists of kings and priests, historical monuments, inscriptions, stelae, tombs, & pyramids. Historical records & archaeological information from ancient Egypt are extensive & well documented.
The conflict that has raged from the beginning is the fact that the two accounts are almost completely contradictory. The parallel chronological time-lines are uneven and chaotic. When there are dates that are seemingly well established in one history, the parallel account doesn't match up at all. The conclusion reached by the majority of scholars is that the evidence is saying that one or the other account must be fictional, or riddled with errors.
For example, one Egyptian document will speak of a certain historical account - say a famous battle with a people that sound very much like the Israelites; but the Bible says that during that period, there was peace. Or the Bible will describe a certain tribal settlement during a very specific time period, while the archaeological records show no hint of any Israelite occupation in that strata.
Another seeming contradiction is found in Old Testament prophecy. In both Jeremiah and Ezekiel, we have prophecies that say that Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon would go to war with Egypt; yet in the Egyptian accounts, there is apparently no record of such an invasion. And what of the Exodus account - the foundation of the Jewish faith?
The Bible says that Egypt was completely and incontrovertibly decimated through 10 cataclysmic plagues. Exodus further states that the entire Egyptian army and their god-king, the Pharaoh, drowned when the waIls of the red sea collapsed after the fleeing Israelites had escaped. Yet the Egyptologists uniformly state that there is no Egyptian historical record of such a catastrophe. How can this be?
Because of the widespread dissemination of these apparent historical inconsistencies and discrepancies, the overwhelming majority of teachers, scientists, linguistics experts, archaeology professors, and scholars of every discipline believe the Egyptian accounts are accurate; and because these secular professionals are predisposed to reject the staggering and often miraculous claims of the Bible (and thereby rid themselves of the conviction of the Holy Spirit that is seeking to point them to the truth), these Egyptian historical records have been endorsed and practically canonized by modern man. Conversely, the 'religious' accounts from the same period (as recorded in the Old Testament), have been relegated to the trash bin as unscientific and contradictory legend and myth.
The vehicle that has seemingly accomplished this overwhelming denial of the truth of ancient history as documented in the Bible has been Egypt. In fact, Egyptology is (arguably) the largest single field of specialization in the study of antiquities. The study of the contradictions alone has baffled students of both historical time-lines for ages. How ironic that the explanation for all of these anomalies was originally published over 40 years ago; and yet the same scholars who have rejected the historicity of the scriptures have rejected the truth of why these seeming contradictions exist.
Immanuel Velikovsky (1895-1980) was the first scholar to fully understand and explain the puzzle of ancient history. Velikovsky determined that the chronological time-lines between the two historical chronologies were shifted by early archaeologists as they interpreted what they thought the data was telling them.
In a now obscure book called Ages In Chaos, Velikovsky convincingly showed that an error in the Egyptian chronology of about 600 to 700 years has caused all the confusion. As each chronological event in the two parallel accounts occurs, the two accounts consistently differ because one of them is always recounting events that are out of sequence by about 700 years. It is not an accident that such a historical dislocation has occurred.
To try to grasp the scope & severity of the miscalculation, let's say that in the far distant future historians are looking at the history of England and America. A rough analogy would be if the historians were looking at British accounts that were dated 1341, and then somehow came upon a group of American historical events that actually occurred in 1941. The American records had no dates, so the students thought the American events of 1941 paralleled the British events that occurred in 1341.
Using this distorted premise of history, Velikovsky states that,
"The Churchill of 1341 could not have visited this country, but must have visited some other land...and met its chief. Another chief, not Franklin Delano Roosevelt of Washington, would live in history as cosigner of a charter with Churchill of Britain in 1341. But as American records would speak of Churchill who crossed the ocean in the early forties of the twentieth century, British history would also have a Churchill II, six hundred years after the first one." 2.
Please allow me to elaborate. If Churchill was mentioned by name in the American accounts, but the British accounts simply mentioned a king, the scholars might have assumed that Churchill was that king because they've assumed the two chronologies are parallel. Then, when even later records clearly documented that a man named Churchill was prominent 600 years later, they would have assumed he was another Churchill. Furthermore, they probably would have called him Churchill II instead of reconstructing the original chronology.
Velikovsky's revisionist explanation has not only demonstrated that many dynasties have been counted twice, but even some ancient empires have been counted twice because different accounts use different linguistic versions of their names.
Velikovsky showed, for example, that the so-called Hittite empire never even existed, but was really the neo-Babylonian empire simply noted under another one of their national names. To further illustrate this complicated scenario, let us go back to our future analogy.
Archaeologists dig up extensive histories of the Americans 1,000 years in the future, and they find numerous references to the Californians. Because they don't have anything to show that California is part of America, they try to place the history of the 'nation' of California before or after the history of America. In other words, instead of counting their histories concurrently, they instead record them consecutively. So now you have 220 years of American history plus 150 years of California history for a total of 370 years. This error then forces the scholars to work up all sorts of scenarios to explain the additional 150 years of history which never actually expired.
Multiply this error a thousand fold and you can see why the accounts are so distorted. As scholars continue to study the histories of Egypt and her neighbors, the error is compounded because each historical key event, dynasty, or empire is effectively doubled because of the original error. This means the historical accounts would be so convoluted that the scholars would be compelled to put forth all sorts of exotic explanations to explain why various historical names continually show up again 600 or 700 years later. Each of these historical 'doubles' then is, in effect, considered a descendant of himself.
Velikovsky (and other writers such as David Fry, myself, and others) have shown that this false chronological sequencing has contaminated the studies of all ancient nations such as the Babylonians, the Assyrians, and the Persians, in addition to the Egyptians. Because every ancient historical chronology is synchronized to the Egyptian time-line instead of the accurate Hebrew time-line, our entire perception of ancient history has been completely distorted; and accordingly, man's "foolish heart was darkened" 3.
Once the two chronologies have been properly re-synchronized by conforming the Egyptian chronology to the Hebrew accounts in the Bible, all the various events begin to mirror each other in the two chronologies. The characters frequently have different names, but that is not uncommon in ancient societies. The Bible might have one name for an Egyptian king, while the parallel Egyptian account uses many different names. Ancient kings were known to have throne names, religious names, dynastic names, and so forth. There are documented cases of several Pharaohs with as many as 30 different names. If these names are stretched end to end consecutively, you can have an entire dynasty of 30 kings listed when actually there was only one!
The original chronological errors go back at least to the time of the pyramids in Egypt; however the dating of the pyramids can actually help us to accurately re-synchronize the two histories. While there is evidence that the pyramids were somehow related to the Semitic designed ziggurats of Mesopotamia (the Tower of Babel was a ziggurat), scholars aren't sure how the design got imported into Egypt. This is a first rate clue, because the pyramids show up rather suddenly during the start of the 3rd Egyptian dynasty.
Writer David Fry has noted that 3 things had to occur for the pyramid age to begin: They needed a technical mastermind to design them, there had to be a social need (or possibly a crisis) that was intense enough to unify the people into a common goal, and most importantly, the royal family had to have the wealth to finance such an undertaking.
Egyptian historical accounts provide part of the picture, but logic and familiarity with the scriptures will help us to synchronize the time with the Biblical accounts. The Egyptian histories specify that the first pyramid was designed by Egypt's first Grand Vizier. A very wise man named Imhotep, his name appears in the archaeological records on the pedestal of a statue in the court of the step pyramid (the first pyramid). According to most authorities, this Imhotep came to power under Pharaoh Zoser just before a great 7-year famine. 4. The accounts say that this famine occurred because the Nile failed to rise.
The Egyptian Stele of the Famine further states that the Pharaoh asked Imhotep how to deal with the problem of the famine. Other historians associate Imhotep with Pathotep who was also the Grand Vizier of Egypt during ancient times. They are very likely one and the same for the second name simply adds the Egyptian god name 'path' or 'ptah' to the individual's name.
The interesting thing about Imhotep/Pathotep is that the Egyptian accounts say he was "a foreigner," who lived to be 110. The famous Egyptologist James Breasted wrote that "The success of Zoser's efforts was perhaps in part due to the counsel of the great wise-man, Imhotep, who was one of his chief advisers. In priestly wisdom...and architecture, this remarkable figure...was never forgotten." 5. The historical records show that Imhotep was among the most beloved leaders in all of Egyptian history. He was so favored by Pharaoh himself that the king gave him the daughter of the high priest of Heliopolis to be his wife.
According to another of Imhotep's biographers, one of his greatest political achievements was the inauguration of the first income tax in Egypt. She writes that this "...income tax in Egypt was one-fifth of the harvest and of the increase of cattle, plus several months of labor each year upon great public works by all able bodied men." 6. Yet another historian writes that,
"The Egyptians ascribed the invention of the art of building with stone to Imhotep, Vizier and architect of King Zoser, who reigned about 50 years before the building of the great pyramid... The Egyptians described Imhotep as a sort of Leonardo da Vinci of Egypt, mathematician, scientist, engineer, and architect." 7.
This statement clearly puts Imhotep in the time of the building of the first pyramid. Although there is a tremendous body of additional evidence about Imhotep/Pathotep, by now it should be obvious that Imhotep was, indeed, the son of Jacob described in the Bible as JOSEPH.
The scriptures say that Joseph came to prominence in Pharaoh's court by interpreting a startling & vivid prophetic dream of the king. The prophetic dream forecast a great 7-year famine that was to fall on Egypt. Joseph & Imhotep both came to power as a result of his counsel to the Pharaoh amidst a great 7-year famine.
The Egyptian records show Imhotep created the first income tax and that it was "one-fifth." The book of Genesis says that income tax came to Egypt because "...Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part...." 8.
The Egyptian inscriptions show that Imhotep/Pathotep was the first Grand Vizier of Egypt while the Genesis record says that Pharaoh set Joseph "...over all the land of Egypt" and said to him "...only in the throne will I be greater than thou." 9.
Imhotep/Pathotep's biographers say he "...was not a native Egyptian, " 10. while the Bible also clearly shows that Joseph was not an Egyptian, but a Hebrew. The Egyptian documents say that Imhotep/ Pathotep lived to be 110. Genesis says that "...Joseph died, being an hundred and ten years old...." 11. The Egyptian accounts say that Pharaoh held Imhotep in such high esteem that he gave him the daughter of the high priest of Heliopolis as his wife. The Bible says Pharaoh gave Joseph "Asenath the daughter of Potipherah priest of On." 12. The city of On was also known as Heliopolis.
There are many, many more compelling reasons to connect the two. Why have I gone into such detail? Because the conventional historical chronology put forth by authorities everywhere says that Joseph could not possibly be Imhotep because they are sure that they lived about 600 to 700 years apart. But did they?
November 18, 2002 - James Lloyd
Copyright © 2002 Christian Media Network
1. Egypt In Biblical Prophecy, Wilbur M Smith, 1957, page 55
2. Ages In Chaos, Immanuel Velikovsky, page 21
3. Romans 1:21
4. The Pyramids, Ahmed Fakhry, page 23, cited by David Fry in Hebrew Sages Of Ancient Egypt
5. A History Of Egypt (1937), James Breasted, page 112, cited by David Fry in Hebrew Sages
6. Imhotep, Builder In Stone (1965), Maribelle Cormack, page 29, cited by David Fry In Hebrew Sages
7. Secrets Of The Great Pyramid, Peter Tompkins, page 375, cited by David Fry In Hebrew Sages
8. Genesis 47:26
9. Genesis 41:41, 40
10. Hebrew Sages Of Ancient Egypt (1994), David Fry, page 43
11. Genesis 50:26
12. Genesis 41:45
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © 2000-2010 CHRISTIAN MEDIA RESEARCH