YouTube Video pwcer_BV6BM 🔗 **Source:** [YouTube Video pwcer_BV6BM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [biblical_criticism, pseudoarchaeology, exodus_historicity] > author: Digital Hammurabi > source: YouTube > reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM > date created: 2024-12-28 14:30 > > # 🏷️ Title: Debunking "Choke Points" in Biblical History and Archaeology > <!-- deep-read:sections start --> ## 🧰 Action Inbox - [H1] Examine claims about Red Sea archaeological evidence — no peer-reviewed sources exist #pseudoarchaeology - [H2] Research actual Hyksos period chronology — misrepresented by apologist #historical_accuracy - [H3] Review Psalm 136 literary dependence on Exodus — post-exilic elaboration #biblical_criticism ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ### 🔗 References - [Digital Hammurabi YouTube Channel](https://www.youtube.com/@DigitalHammurabi) - [Biblical Criticism Academic Resources](https://academic.oup.com/jss) ## 📝 Summary - Biblical apologist claims "choke points" explain apparent contradictions in Exodus historicity - Scholar responds by debunking fabricated archaeological evidence and misrepresented historical sources - Core issue: imposing literalist assumptions on texts that don't support historical Exodus - Key fabrications include fake Red Sea chariot wheels and misunderstanding of Manetho's account - Bottom line: No archaeological or historical evidence supports the Exodus narrative as described ## 📖 Main Content A biblical apologist introduces the concept of "choke points" - alleged strategic gaps in understanding that prevent proper interpretation of biblical history. The scholar responds by systematically dismantling claims about archaeological evidence for the Exodus. The apologist argues that since we have mummies of proposed Exodus pharaohs (Amenhotep II, Ramesses II, Thutmose III), none could be the pharaoh who drowned in the Red Sea according to Psalm 136:15. He claims archaeological expeditions found Egyptian chariot wheels, weapons, and bones at the bottom of the Red Sea. The scholar explains these claims trace back to Ron Wyatt's discredited work from decades ago. The famous "golden chariot wheel" photo shows a modern boat steering wheel in shallow water. No peer-reviewed archaeological publications document any Egyptian military remains in the Red Sea. Regarding Manetho's account of the Hyksos, the apologist misrepresents the 3rd century BCE historian as asking where Egypt's army disappeared, allowing Asiatic peoples to conquer without battle. The scholar clarifies Manetho never suggests a missing army - he describes the Hyksos rise as divine judgment during a power vacuum, not sudden military conquest. The fundamental issue remains chronological: whether placing the Exodus in the 15th or 13th century BCE, no archaeological evidence supports the biblical account's historicity. ## 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=0) — [H1] Introducing Biblical "Choke Points" - Key idea: Apologist defines choke points as strategic gaps that prevent understanding biblical history - Evidence: Claims these explain apparent contradictions rather than acknowledging textual problems #### ⏱️ [01:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=75) — [H2] The Pharaoh Mummy Problem - Key idea: Apologist argues we have mummies of proposed Exodus pharaohs, so none could have drowned - Evidence: Shows photos of mummies of Amenhotep II, Ramesses II, and Thutmose III #### ⏱️ [02:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=150) — [H2] Psalm 136 and Pharaoh's Death - Key idea: Psalm 136:15 states Pharaoh was overthrown in Red Sea, contradicting mummy evidence - Evidence: Scholar notes this is post-exilic elaboration on Exodus 14:27, not independent source #### ⏱️ [03:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=225) — [H1] Fabricated Red Sea Archaeological Claims - Key idea: Apologist claims friend found Egyptian military remains at bottom of Red Sea - Evidence: Scholar identifies this as Ron Wyatt's discredited work with no peer review #### ⏱️ [05:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=300) — [H1] The Golden Chariot Wheel Hoax - Key idea: Famous photo allegedly shows ancient Egyptian gold wheel that didn't corralize - Evidence: Scholar reveals it's obviously a modern boat steering wheel in shallow water #### ⏱️ [06:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=375) — [H2] No Archaeological Publications Exist - Key idea: Despite decades of claims, no archaeologist published peer-reviewed evidence - Evidence: All alleged artifacts remain unpublished, untested, and unverified #### ⏱️ [07:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=450) — [H2] Church Seminary Teaching Problems - Key idea: Apologist blames churches for creating confusion about pharaoh identity - Evidence: Scholar notes seminaries increasingly recognize literary approaches to these texts #### ⏱️ [09:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=540) — [H1] More Fabricated Red Sea Evidence - Key idea: Apologist doubles down on claims of coralized bones, weapons, and chariots - Evidence: Scholar emphasizes none of this exists - it's "flagrant lie" based on coral photos #### ⏱️ [10:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=645) — [H2] Solomon's Pillars and Gulf of Aqaba - Key idea: Claims Solomon erected pillars marking Red Sea crossing points - Evidence: Scholar explains only one Roman-period architectural pillar found, wrong type and era #### ⏱️ [12:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=720) — [H2] Amalekites as Historical "Choke Point" - Key idea: Apologist asks what happened to Amalekites since Bible says God would destroy them - Evidence: Scholar notes they persist throughout biblical narrative, never fully destroyed #### ⏱️ [13:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=810) — [H1] Misrepresenting Manetho's Account - Key idea: Claims Manetho wondered where Egyptian army went during Hyksos takeover - Evidence: Scholar clarifies Manetho never mentions missing army, describes gradual Asiatic settlement #### ⏱️ [15:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=900) — [H2] Hyksos Rise Historical Reality - Key idea: Gradual Asiatic settlement during Second Intermediate Period, not sudden conquest - Evidence: Centuries of immigration preceding political takeover during Egyptian power vacuum #### ⏱️ [16:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=975) — [H1] Chronological Problems Ignored - Key idea: Apologist appeals to altered chronology to make connections work - Evidence: Scholar notes this conspiracy theory addressed in previous video analysis #### ⏱️ [17:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM&t=1050) — [H2] Root Cause of "Choke Points" - Key idea: Problems stem from imposing dogmatic assumptions on texts - Evidence: Scholar identifies univocality, inspiration, inerrancy assumptions as real issue ## 📚 References - [Digital Hammurabi YouTube Channel](https://www.youtube.com/@DigitalHammurabi) - [Society of Biblical Literature Resources](https://www.sbl-site.org/) - [Archaeological Institute of America](https://www.archaeological.org/) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase - Biblical apologists create "choke points" to explain away contradictions between archaeological evidence and literal biblical interpretation - All claimed Red Sea archaeological evidence traces to Ron Wyatt's fabricated discoveries that were never peer-reviewed or published - Historical sources like Manetho are systematically misrepresented to support predetermined conclusions about Exodus historicity ## 📰 Newsletter Scholars continue debunking pseudoarchaeological claims about biblical history. This analysis reveals how fabricated evidence spreads through religious communities despite lacking academic credibility. The core issue isn't missing information but imposing modern literalist assumptions on ancient texts. When archaeological evidence contradicts biblical narratives, the solution isn't to invent fake artifacts but to understand these texts within their proper literary and historical contexts. Key lesson: Always verify archaeological claims through peer-reviewed publications and recognized academic institutions. Resources: [Society of Biblical Literature](https://www.sbl-site.org/), [Archaeological Institute of America](https://www.archaeological.org/), [Digital Hammurabi](https://www.youtube.com/@DigitalHammurabi) ## ✅ Action Items #### DevRel - Developer advocacy: Create fact-checking resources for evaluating archaeological claims online - Education: Develop workshops on distinguishing peer-reviewed from pseudoarchaeological sources - Community management: Moderate discussions about historical evidence standards #### OSPO - Policy & Governance: Establish guidelines for citing archaeological sources in documentation - License Compliance: Review image usage rights for archaeological photographs - Community Engagement: Partner with academic institutions for credible historical resources #### Community - Contributors: Train moderators to identify and address pseudoarchaeological claims - Sponsors: Support academic archaeology through transparent educational funding - Ecosystem: Coordinate with scholarly organizations for accurate historical information #### WordPress - Documentation: Create guidelines for citing historical and archaeological sources - Community: Develop educational resources about evaluating online historical claims - Support: Train support staff to recognize and redirect pseudoarchaeological inquiries ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Religious communities preferentially share archaeological claims that confirm existing beliefs regardless of evidence quality - Pseudoarchaeological claims persist longer in non-academic communities due to confirmation bias and limited fact-checking - Visual evidence (photos, videos) spreads faster than textual corrections even when images are demonstrably fabricated - Educational interventions about source evaluation reduce susceptibility to pseudoarchaeological claims ### 📊 Methodology - Content analysis of archaeological claim propagation across religious vs academic communities - Survey research on factors influencing belief in disputed archaeological evidence - Experimental studies testing effectiveness of fact-checking interventions - Longitudinal tracking of how fabricated claims evolve over time ### ❓ Questions - Why do fabricated archaeological claims persist decades after being debunked? - How can educational institutions better prepare students to evaluate historical evidence? - What role do confirmation bias and motivated reasoning play in accepting pseudoarchaeological claims? ### 🔮 Future Research - Systematic analysis of Ron Wyatt's influence on contemporary biblical archaeology claims - Comparative study of pseudoarchaeological movements across different religious traditions - Development of digital literacy curricula for evaluating archaeological evidence online ### 💡 Implications - Practice: Implement rigorous source verification before sharing archaeological claims - Policy: Academic institutions need clearer guidelines about engaging with pseudoarchaeology - Security: Misinformation about historical evidence undermines public trust in legitimate scholarship - Education: Critical thinking skills about evidence evaluation need integration into curricula - Funding: Resources should prioritize actual archaeological work over responding to fabricated claims ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment Reading level estimate: 12th grade (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level) #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: Screenshots of fabricated evidence, photos comparing real vs fake artifacts - Improve: Infographics showing proper archaeological documentation process #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Video format with clear narration and explanation - Improve: Podcast series on evaluating archaeological claims #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Clear definitions of archaeological terms, detailed explanations - Improve: Glossary of archaeological methodology terms #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Step-by-step analysis of evidence evaluation process - Improve: Interactive exercises in source verification #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Systematic refutation following logical sequence - Improve: Decision trees for evaluating archaeological claims #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: Academic community response to pseudoarchaeological claims - Improve: Discussion forums for collaborative fact-checking #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: Individual analysis and reflection on evidence - Improve: Self-assessment tools for evaluating source credibility #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - Present: Connections between archaeological methodology and scientific processes - Improve: Analogies to natural processes in evidence evaluation ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Clear heading structure, descriptive video content - Improve: Audio descriptions for visual evidence comparisons #### Keyboard navigation - Present: Standard video controls accessible via keyboard - Improve: Transcript navigation with keyboard shortcuts #### Contrast and readability - Present: Standard YouTube video player interface - Improve: High contrast mode for accompanying materials #### Text resizing and reflow - Present: Responsive transcript display - Improve: Adjustable text size for analytical annotations #### Media and captions - Present: Video content with transcript provided - Improve: Professional captions with speaker identification #### Forms and interactions - Present: Standard comment interface - Improve: Accessible fact-checking submission forms #### Standards reference - Video accessibility could improve with WCAG 2.2 AA media guidelines ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: Focus on Middle Eastern archaeology and biblical scholarship - Improve: Include diverse archaeological traditions and methodologies #### Inclusive language - Present: Academic terminology clearly explained - Improve: Avoid assumptions about religious background of audience #### Neurodiversity support - Present: Structured, methodical analysis approach - Improve: Clear content warnings about religious criticism #### Representation - Present: Male-dominated field of biblical archaeology - Improve: Highlight diverse voices in archaeological scholarship #### Psychological safety - Present: Respectful critique of claims rather than personal attacks - Improve: Acknowledge emotional investment in religious beliefs ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Deductive strength: Clear logical structure refuting each claim systematically - Inductive strength: Pattern recognition across multiple fabricated claims - Causal reasoning: Links between pseudoarchaeological claims and confirmation bias - Analogical strength: Effective comparisons to modern boat equipment #### Fallacies - Appeal to authority: Appropriately challenges unqualified archaeological claims - False dilemma: Successfully avoids binary historical/ahistorical framing #### Tone of voice - Overall tone: Scholarly but accessible, appropriately critical without being dismissive of genuine religious concerns ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis - Deny: Apologist denies problems with archaeological evidence by claiming "choke points" - Attack: Targets academic establishment and seminary education as source of confusion - Reverse victim/offender: Positions fundamentalist interpretation as victim of academic bias - Emotional cues and rhetoric: Appeals to religious authority and personal revelation over evidence ## 🎯 Conclusion This analysis reveals how pseudoarchaeological claims persist by exploiting religious communities' desire for historical validation. The concept of "choke points" represents an attempt to reframe contradictory evidence as misun <!-- deep-read:sections end --> ## 📺 Video  --- # 📄 Full Transcript *Auto-generated from YouTube captions · timestamps roughly every 30 seconds · [watch on YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwcer_BV6BM)* **[00:00]** Okay, poppers. Are there certain choke points in the understanding of the Bible and history? >> Choke points, a word that's used. >> Yeah, the answer is yes. >> All right, let's see it. >> That word ought to be used with respect to understanding history and the Bible or misunderstanding it. Chokepoint is something that strategically chokes off understanding in this case. So yeah, there are >> okay, >> there are many of them. >> So it sounds like what this individual **[00:32]** might be talking about is things in the biblical text that do not fit harmoniously within the biblical text themselves or within what we know about history. And rather than just acknowledge that, this individual is going to try to reframe them as choke points that cause misunderstanding because somebody does not have adequate or the correct information or framework or way to approach these texts. >> Let me give you an example online. I **[01:02]** won't use the man's name. I don't think it's fair uh that I use it, [clears throat] but he raised this. He said that uh that um Ramsy's II, Pharaoh Ramsey's II is most commonly called the the uh pharaoh of the Exodus. He said, "Therefore, I conclude that since he was called the great," and by the way, we have his mummy. I'll explain that in a minute. He didn't say that. He said, "I'm forced to conclude that Egypt was not in fact damaged by the plagues of the Bible. Ergo, there is no, you know, **[01:35]** the there is no truth to the Exodus account." >> I think it's probably fair to say that's the most common apologetic retreat is to identifying Ramsy's II as the Pharaoh of the Exodus. But that causes other chronological and historical problems and it requires the later Exodus time frame. And there's an earlier one that requires the identification of an earlier pharaoh as the pharaoh of the Exodus, which is more common among a **[02:06]** number of contemporary apologists. So, it's debated among apologists which pharaoh it is, and it's not any of them because the data do not support the historicity of the existence of Moses, much less the Exodus. >> Um, I beg to differ. He's choking over a choke point. And the [clears throat] choke point is not not really his fault. It's the church's fault. See, here's a [clears throat] there's a picture here of three pharaohs. **[02:38]** There are three pharaohs and they are I mean these guys are ugly. Why? Because they are the mummies of these three pharaohs. These are the three pharaohs most commonly used as candidates of the of the exodus. And that would be Amanoteep the second, Ramsey's the second, and Tutmos the third. You'll notice again we have their mummies. You know what's wrong with that? What [clears throat] >> it's true that Exodus doesn't tell us **[03:09]** that Pharaoh was drowned in the Red Sea. But the psalmist does. in Psalm 136 of verse 15, but overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea, for his mercy endures forever. >> But Psalm 136 is just a post- exilic psalm that is elaborating on Exodus 14:27. It has no special access to narratives that are not found in the book of Exodus. It is obviously based on **[03:40]** the book of Exodus. But if you presuppose univocality and ignore that this is a later author elaborating on the tradition you already have in the book of Exodus, then you can imagine that you have special additional details to overlay upon the book of Exodus that can help you to try to figure out where we can situate all of this historically. So the pharaoh and and his army were overthrown. In fact, my good friend **[04:13]** whose marine archaeological we we referred to him marine archaeological expedition uh to the Red Sea showed in fact the scattered remains the the coralized remains of the Egyptian army at the bottom of the Red Sea. >> Yeah. No such remains have ever been discovered by any archaeological excavation and this individual cannot even pretend to point to any publication that demonstrates the discovery of any such remains. It sounds to me like they are remembering the things that Ron Wyatt claimed to have discovered and **[04:46]** they are either passing these things off as the claims of a contemporary archaeologist which means either they're lying to the camera or they have a friend who is lying to them >> and they found you know what this is right? >> Yes. the golden shield, the golden wheel and the shields >> of the army, except they're oified. They're well, I shouldn't say it that way, coralized. >> No, no such wheel or shield has ever **[05:17]** been found. It sounds to me like this individual is recalling this photo, which I think might come from Ron Wyatt. I don't know that for sure, but it certainly originates around the same time. And the claim is that this is a gold Egyptian chariot wheel and that it did not coralize precisely because it's gold. But this is very obviously a photo of a modern boat steering wheel in very shallow water just sitting on the seafloor. And one of the reasons we know **[05:49]** this is not a 3,400year-old gold Egyptian artifact just resting on the seafloor is that no one ever took it up to the surface or published any kind of peer-reviewed paper or archaeological report or anything like that that has anything to do with any such artifact. Somebody took a picture, started sharing it. People started claiming that it was ancient Egyptian artifact. And it is absolutely no such thing whatsoever. **[06:20]** >> But the golden wheel, shields, weaponry, all Egyptian and and uh coralized chariots, the golden wheel of the Pharaoh. >> Not a single one of those things has ever been discovered in the Red Sea. This is just a flagrant lie. And it's probably based on the photos of coral that Ron Wyatt took that reminded Ron Wyatt of the wheels and axles of chariots. But uh again, no archaeologist **[06:52]** ever took any of that to the surface. No archaeologist ever published any kind of paper or archaeological report or anything that demonstrates that they are anything other than for the most part just random coral. And then this one photo of a modern boat steering wheel. >> So the psalmist was right. >> None of y'all are right. >> You see the fellow that raised that. Again, it's not fair for me to use his name, but [clears throat] **[07:23]** um we created a stumbling block. We meaning the churches. Now I' I've been teaching this for 40 years. I know who the actual pharaoh was. >> Well, spoiler alert. He's not going to tell us who he thinks the pharaoh of the Exodus actually was, but it doesn't matter because whoever he imagines it was. He's wrong. And all the evidence he's claiming to aduce doesn't exist because the Exodus is not historical. There are no data that support the conclusion of the historicity of the **[07:55]** Exodus. And whether you pick Ramsy's II or Aman Hoteep II or the mystery pharaoh that he's teasing in this video, there are going to be insurmountable chronological and archaeological and historical problems because it just doesn't work. The data don't support the conclusion that the Exodus was historical. But I raised it as a choke point because how would we have their mummies if there if the pharaoh was at the **[08:26]** bottom of the Red Sea? And 40 years ago I raised that question in my class and my graduate students and other stu well actually high school and college my graduate students also all have a problem answered. Nobody knows the answer. That's our fault. the church. >> I suppose this is true because the church demands that you understand the Exodus as not just true history but inherent history which means you are **[08:57]** required to find a way to make it work even if it just doesn't work. >> The churches and the seminaries teach these three. >> You think the seminaries will get Psalm 136 right? Well, I think most of the seminaries are a little more serious about their literary approaches to the Bible. Not incredibly serious, but a little more serious. And so, they're going to recognize that Psalm 136 is just riffing on Exodus 14 to begin with. It does not have access to information that is omitted from the book of Exodus. **[09:29]** But if you want the Exodus to be historical, you have to place it either in the late 13th century B.CE or the late 15th century BCE. And you're kind of forced to pick between either Ramsy's II or Aman Hoteep II as the two main candidates, but they also really don't fit, which is why there continues to be debate even among people who imagine that this is all historical. But no, they don't. I've sat in three **[10:00]** schools and I've had three sets of professors that have told me that, you know, the pharaoh didn't die in the in the Red Sea. >> Well, I sat in four schools and the first one said, "We're not going to tell you it's not historical, but it doesn't really fit anywhere." And the other three all said, "Yeah, this isn't really historical." So maybe this guy should have found some schools that were better at their history. >> I beg to differ with each of you three. **[10:31]** We have his golden chariot wheel. We have the shields, the chariots, we have the weaponry, the coralized bones [snorts] of horses and men all mangled together. >> Not a single word of that is true. That is all entirely fabricated. The closest we get to any of that being true is that a coralized human femur was pulled out of the Red Sea. But there's absolutely nothing that connects it in any way, **[11:02]** shape, or form whatsoever with the ancient world, much less with any kind of historical exodus. >> Why? Because the waves stood up on either end and they collapsed literally millions of tons and crushed them. And there's spe there there's there they are spewed across the floor of the Red Sea called the right arm of the Red Sea is called the Gulf of Aquaba. Solomon put up a pillar on either side **[11:33]** of the Red Sea where Israel went in and where Israel came out. So here at least I know he's definitely talking about Ron Wyatt's fabrications because Ron Wyatt claimed to have found two round pillars set up on either side of the Gulf of Akaba. And he said the one that was set up on the Saudi Arabia side had a Hebrew inscription on it. And of course he was unable to provide any evidence whatsoever for that. not photos, not **[12:04]** video, not even uh any sketch or anything. All we have is the one pillar from the other side of the Gulf of Aaba, which is from the Roman period, a thousand years after Solomon was supposed to have lived. And it's also an architectural pillar, not a standing stone, which is what the Hebrew Bible is talking about when it talks about people setting up pillars. The pillar is circular and cylindrical **[12:36]** and the standing stone that is discussed the matsaba in the Hebrew Bible is flat on one side and then rounded on the other side. So what Ron Wyatt found was a single Roman period architectural pillar that has absolutely no connection whatsoever with Solomon or with ancient Egypt. And he just pretended that he discovered a matching one on the other side. and that it had an inscription on it that was in Hebrew and talked about the crossing of the Red Sea. None of **[13:07]** that's true. That's all entirely made up. >> By the way, the Egyptians followed except that Israel went in, went down 600 m on a gradual slope, went across on dry land by the way. So the Lord took care of all the details >> or at least we can imagine it that way if we are motivated to. They came up, Egypt went down and the waters came down suddenly and **[13:39]** crushed them. That was seen by nations all around the Middle East. There are people watching this progress because slaves, former slaves leaving Egypt was a big deal in foreign policy. If they could pull this off, that meant Egypt was weak. And guess what? There were people watching. They are called the Amalachites. Now that's another choke point. Where are the Amalachites? They've disappeared from history. Of course, one detail. **[14:12]** Deuteronomy 25 says that God is going to punish the Amalachites so that they won't be a memory anymore except in his word. >> No. Deuteronomy 25:19 is referring to a passage in Exodus where God commands Moses and the Israelites to blot out the memory of Amalecch. And they don't do it. They're still around in the period of the judges. They're still around for Saul to claim that he has entirely destroyed them. But then they're still around toward the end of 1 Samuel. They're **[14:43]** still around at the beginning of 2 Samuel for David to fight against and to defeat. So, it's not God saying that they're the one who's going to blot out the memory of Amalecch. It's God commanding the Israelites to do it and they never figure out how to do it. >> He's going to obliterate them. So, what happened to the Amalachites, I wonder? >> Well, if they ever actually existed, a lot of things can happen to a small people group over the course of **[15:13]** thousands of years. Well, that brings up another choke point and a fellow by the name of Manathau choked over it. See, he's writing. There's a painting of him. He's writing oh about oh, let me see about 1,200 years earlier. >> Mantha is writing in the early 3rd century BCE. So this is neither 1,200 years earlier nor 1200 years later than anything this individual has talked about **[15:44]** >> about his own nation of Egypt. He's writing a history. He came to a place where Egypt was at the height of a world power. And he said what happened to the army? Because a whole bunch of bedawins came out of the desert and swept Egypt. He said, "And they took Egypt without a battle." That's what the record says. >> So that's what Manthos says in an attempt to try to account for the rise of the Hixos and the rule of Aiatics in **[16:18]** Egypt. And Mantho frames it as divine judgment. He never says anything about the army not being there. He just says that they were able to take over rule without a battle. And again, that's about his claiming that Egypt was under divine judgment and the Aatics were allowed to take over. And this is part of the ancient myth that the Hixos took over rule violently or in some kind of revolution or suddenly when in fact what **[16:49]** actually happened is that there had long been an influx of Semitic Asiatic peoples into the area. And when there was a power vacuum during the second intermediate period, they stepped up and took over rule of the Nile Delta, moving the capital to Avarus. So appealing to Mantho and misunderstanding Mantho doesn't really do this individual any favors. It just shows that they don't understand the history. >> They didn't. There was no major battle. He said, "Where did the Egyptian army **[17:22]** go?" >> Mantho never asks where the Egyptian army went. Mantho never suggests that the Egyptian army was mysteriously absent or missing. >> Imagine America's at the height of her power, Army, Navy, Air Force, aircraft carriers, and a whole bunch of guys on camels come across whatever they do and sweep the United States and there's no battle. >> Okay. >> Well, that wouldn't make any sense. The natural question is where the where did **[17:53]** our army, navy, and air force go? So that's a choke point. >> No, it's just cherrypicking texts while misunderstanding and ignoring centuries of actual critical historioggraphy. >> Chokepoint is a strategic glut. It's an area where it we can't get past the knotted the knotted moral that's there. Manifod didn't know how to answer it. Well, we do. They were bought the armies at the bottom of the Red Sea. Like I **[18:24]** said, other nations were watching and the Bedawins, called the Amalachites, swept in and took Egypt without a battle. >> Yeah, none of that happened. That's entirely made up. >> But do you see the choke point? Why is it that we can't find it in the annals of Egypt? >> I feel like this is a pretty easy question to answer >> and historians neglect these choke points. >> No, they don't. you have invented them and actual historians know the history **[18:57]** too well to be duped by this notion of choke points >> because there's something called chronology. >> Yes, historians know what chronology is. But this individual is talking about a specific conspiracy theory he has about why Egyptian chronology is off. And I address that in the previous video of mine that addresses his ridiculous claims. In my podcast, Choke points through time, **[19:28]** I begin to answer quite a few. Now, I'm going to answer these. We'll we'll get to them here, too. But in the podcast, I raised choke points, and I I'll be raising dozens of those in the Bible. Why is it we can't understand this book? Because of all of the dogmas that you bring to it and that you impose upon it and to which you subordinate it that require you renegotiate univocality and inspiration and inherency and historicity and all of that stuff into it where it doesn't belong **[20:00]** >> because there's choke points what people have done with it. There's choke points in history. I'm not here to suggest that we are the only ones having the right interpretation. That's nonsense. There are many, many good churches, many good men. >> And what about women? >> But the debris of bad teaching, it's like a cloud hanging over the rest of us. It's hard to get these out to the public. Does that make sense? >> Yeah. >> So, the choke points there, those are two. What happened to **[20:32]** the pharaoh? Who was the pharaoh? Never told you that. Got three that we know. They're pretty ugly. You know, they got their mummies. They can't be it. We know that Pharaoh was buried in the Red Sea. >> No, you have imagined that based on the dogmas that you have imposed upon the texts and combined with your inability to engage competently with the diiacronic literary qualities of the text. >> So who was the pharaoh? I wonder. >> It was a fictional pharaoh. **[21:05]** >> What was Manitho talking about? He was talking about the rise of the Hixos as rulers in the Nile Delta centuries before you date the Exodus. >> How come he didn't know? We're going to answer these and many other choke points. I'm >> pretty sure that's just going to be made up stuff as well. The fit for this video has been my University of Oxford windbreaker.