Historical Evidence fo the Ten Plagues of the Exodus

The last article established some basic considerations that are hard to refute.  For your recollection, these were: 1. The Exodus occurred in the last two years of the reign of Amenhotep III, 2. Moses was a Crown Prince of Egypt and in fact was the renegade Thutmose, 3. Monotheism was already becoming a contentious issue in Egypt and was challenging the existing pantheon of gods. 4. The city of Pi-Ramses was actually Avaris and over a twenty-five year span, Amenhotep used slave labour comprised of the Hapiru, the same people it is believed were the Hebrews.   All this sounds very convincing but it is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg.  There is far more evidence which is about to be discussed which helps cement the case solid.  Once again, I repeat  my belief that the more scientific, archeological, historical evidence that can be provided to support the Exodus story, even if it does not actually portray the events exactly as they are described in the Torah these are vital to the overall teachings of the Law Giver, proving that it was not the story but the lessons that must be learned by all.  Again, this is the essential pillar of Karaism, that the teachings and the law supersedes all else.   And if clarifying the means by which these teachings are portrayed helps to create believers of those that have lost their way, then so much the better.     Because teaching is what not only being a Karaite but being Kahana is what our purpose in life has been since the beginning.

Dating the Plagues

The matter of the plagues has already been discussed in the article http://hubpages.com/hub/Rediscovering-the-Exodus and therefore rediscussing each individual plague doesn’t serve any purpose in establishing the time line since none were ever recorded by Egyptian historians.  But this article did serve the purpose of demonstrating that such events could occur if there was a major eruption.  And the reality of an eruption of this magnitude was thoroughly discussed in http://hubpages.com/hub/Rediscovering-the-Exodus-2 where we see there were a series of major volcanic eruptions occurring in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries BC, the Thera eruption being the most catastrophic and the one which occurred during the reign of Amenhotep III.
Now the first of those articles looked at the plausibility of the plagues occurring but the question has always been why was there never any record of them in Egyptian history?  And as mentioned previously, Egyptian Pharaohs had no desire to list their disasters for posterity, concentrating only on their successes.  Unfortunately, this meant that even if they did occur, there purposely would be no record of them as proof and that is where most investigators leave off their pursuit and classify the event as impossible to prove.  Had they thought beyond the black and white they would have seen that there was circumstantial evidence to suggest the plagues actually did occur and they happened in the last two years of Amenhotep III’s reign.
For every action there is a reaction.  We have all experienced this law of mankind.  If someone was to hurt us, we would take action to protect ourselves from it ever happening again.  There is always a response to an adverse event and Amenhotep was no different from any other human.  He had been hurt, his country had suffered, his firstborn was lost to him forever, and he would rely on the gods to ensure that he would never suffer such a catastrophe again.  There was only one god of Egypt that he would turn to.  The goddess of disasters, Sekhmet and in the last two years of his reign, the Pharoah dedicated to Amun and Ra at his birth was suddenly history’s biggest advocate of this small time goddess.  He began erecting hundreds upon hundreds of statues all over the country.  The temple at Ashur that he was building for the chief goddess Must was suddenly dedicated to this second string goddess, Sekhmet.  Many of these statues can now be found in museums all over the world because he erected so many.  At Luxor alone he erected seven hundred Sekhmet statues.  So despite history’s recording of Amenhotep III’s reign as being a period of stability, prosperity and expansion, there was obviously something that occurred that sent shivers down his spine and made him start trying to appease the goddess of disasters almost to the point of madness.  If we examine Egyptian Mythology and realize that Sekhmet according to legend tried to destroy all of mankind and only through the intervention of her father Ra was mankind saved, then we have a gauge of the degree of madness he was experiencing.  As far as Amenhotep was concerned, he was saving his people, his country, his kingdom from total destruction; the weapons of mass destruction known as the Ten Plagues.  He was desperately trying to appease the goddess of disaster so that she would stop the plagues being visited upon the land by this unknown God of his son, Thutmose.

Summary

Now we have a date.  The last two years of Amenhotep III"s reign which places the events somwhere between the years 1350 to 1360 BC since we don't actually know the actual dates of Egyptian Pharaohs within more or less  of a decade.  Even though the historical records do not say that the plagues were visited upon Egypt at this time, we have enough evidence in the form of statues to suggest that a major catastrophe did occur that terrified the Egyptian monarch beyond any nightmare that we could imagine.  But then again, we don't have to imagine it because the Torah provides us with a pretty accurate description of what occurred.  I'm not about to stop here, there is more to my investigation yet to be revealed but that will have to wait until the next article.  So until then, Peace be with You.
Avrom Aryeh Zuk Kahana

Exodus and Ethiopia Part 7

The most read article that I have on this website concerns the Ethiopian Princess that Moses married. Why has this story created such a stir that it has become a feature on other sites that have copied and posted it, spreading the word of this long forgotten relationship? I have seen the information in the article used from those proclaiming the true decent of the Israelites was through Africa, by others that proclaim that we are all one people, and also by those that have seen it as one more device to spread anti-Semitic propaganda. Three different perspectives, diametrically opposed and yet all quoting the same article for their justification. I have even witnessed its rebuttal by Jewish groups, totally ignoring that the Torah, the Old Testament, itself states that our origins were as a mixed multitude. Do they not understand what a mixed multitude means? Are we that myopic that we must divide our religious beliefs between black and white and taint it with the prejudices that have afflicted mankind since its creation? Or cannot the simple beauty of this ancient story, where a man and a woman see one another, not in terms of their external appearance but for what they are inside. That which counts the most is the lesson tht must prevail. And no where better do we learn this lesson tha from the Queen of Sheba.

A Sacred Line

I cherish the fact that we had roots that extended beyond the borders of Canaan and Egypt.  I praise Moses for his lofty ideals that transcended race or creed or colour.  And once upon a time, so too did the rest of the Israelite population as we can recognize from Flavius Josephus’s record of this fabled liaison, the inclusion of such stories in the Talmud (one of the few times I’ll praise the Talmud for any of its content) and the writings of Artapanus and Cornelius Polyhistor.  None of these authors saw the marriage of Moses to the Princess of Ethiopia as anything less than a testimony of Moses’ greatness.  A relationship that was well known and understood in ancient times because the Queen of Sheba had no other purpose in seeking the bed chambers of Solomon but to re-establish the sacredness of offspring of her lineage.  Recognizing that the line of Moses had been superseded by the house of David, in her wisdom she knew that that the legitimacy of her own reign rested on carrying this seed blessed by God.  And whether or not we choose to recognize the legends and historical records of the Ethiopian royal house, this is exactly how they explained the traditions that they have passed down from father to son for the last three thousand years.   And although no one can state exactly how the Felashim came to be, those Black Jews of Ethiopia, the majority now residing in Israel, that practiced a religion not dissimilar from that which was practiced in Israel pre-Babylonian exile, why should we doubt the obvious.  That they did return with the Queen of Sheba and her son Menelik, and they did rekindle the faith that had been first introduced to them by Moses when he married their princess Tharbis, three hundred years earlier.  Probably the most valuable lesson I learned in life, long ago was that if it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then it is a duck.  Why are there are so many of us that refuse to accept that.  This simple Karaite belief, the fundamental concept of Karaism, that some things in the Torah simply are the way they are described.

The Queen of Sheba

Or do we forget what it says in the Song of Songs? In chapter 1 Verse 5 she admits that she is a beautiful black woman. In the next verse she repeats that she is swarthy, tanned darker than the daughters of Jerusalem. As dark as the tents of Kedar. The Kedarites were a tribe descended from Ishmael. The expression to dwell in the Tents of Kedar was often used to imply that one was cut off from serving God. Therefore she is admitting that she does not follow the Hebrew faith but in Solomon’s eyes she is still beautiful. To read the Targum now, the Rabbis will insist that the story has nothing to do with the love between a man and a woman. They state that the kiss is representative of Gods revelation of the Torah at Sinai. That when the woman says that she is black she is actually referring to Israel’s sinning nature to chase after idols. And that in Verse 9 her reference to herself as Pharaoh’s mare is in reality a reminder of the crossing of the Red Sea. Even Maimonides could not accept the Song of Songs as it simply reads, stating in his Guide to the perplexed it was actually about the love between God and the human soul and not with Israel proper. The fact is that they were all embarrassed by its inclusion by the earlier editors and in their efforts to justify what essentially would have been early pornography they have spent eons trying to explain away the obvious. Because if they didn’t, then they would have to confess that the stories of Moses in Ethiopia were all true and the reasons for the Queen of Sheba visiting Israel had far more to do with a continuation of a royal lineage than they did with coming to ask Solomon a few questions to test his wisdom. They’d have to admit that Solomon as this pinnacle of God’s faithful was lusting after a woman that was neither part of the faith nor physically resembling the general populace.
Firstly, if we were to accept the Rabbi’s arguments then we would have to accuse them of anthropomorphizing God, giving him human features which the woman (being Israel in their view) has now described physically. The invisible, indefinable God is no more. He has circlets on his cheeks and wears beads about his neck as it says in verse ten, and God also has a desire for gold and silver as it states in verse 11. Human obsessions and human frailties and therefore the intended man in this song could never have been God. But in verse 9 we have the ultimate perversion of the Song if we choose to attribute its description to the Almighty. To be a steed has only one implication when a woman describes her lover in such terms. It creates an image that is religiously profane for it would be not in any way dissimilar from the images of Greek gods where Zeus had taken delight in riding human woman after woman, just like a steed rides a mare. And if this truly was a description of a God:Israel relationship, then the banter that is exchanged between the lovers makes no sense at all. For example in Chapter 6 Verse 8, the woman speaks of his having 60 other queens and 80 concubines, as well as a number of serving women, a recognition that she must be happy with the moments she does have with him, content that for a time he has placed her above the others. And as we read Chapter 8 we recognize that they are parting, that the Queen is going away. She cannot be fenced in with walls and turrets as he could do with other women; hardly a comment that Israel would make to God. She knew that the people did not accept her, she admonishes them for her rejection, knowing that had they been of the same people (a brother) then her presence in his bed chambers would have caused no offense to the daughter of Jerusalem that have awoken to condemn their love. But though she must leave, not all the water in the world could quench the love they have for one another. Obviously this is not a song about God and Israel but is exactly what it claims to be. A song of Solomon. A song of Sheba. A song of love!

Exodus and Direct Clues from Moses Part 6

That Which Has Been Written

From http://hubpages.com/hub/A-Karaite-Reading-of-Exodus I wrote about the fable about Moses's name being Moshe, a Hebrew word meaning to draw out, as in to 'draw out of the water' a reminder of the baby in the basket inference. But this was an addition, a post exilic Rabbinic creation. And we know this for a fact because in their commentaries to the Torah, they admit it freely that they knew that the word 'mehshitihu' only had the barest resemblance to the name Moshe and that an Egyptian princess would never have used, let alone known the Hebrew language.  But although they admit this literary flight of fancy, they also refused to admit what the name really meant even though they knew that it was a shortening of the Egyptian meaning ‘son of’.  And in that article, I wrote of the likelihood that Nunmose or Nunmoses was probably the actual name of Moses. And being the primordial god of the river, the Egyptian god that was there at the beginning of all things, it is understandable how the story of drawing the baby from the Nile was born.  Later in the article http://hubpages.com/hub/Rediscovering-the-Exodus-2 I mentioned that the likelihood of the Egyptians even mentioning the Exodus of 15,000 slaves was unlikely, but as I will discuss in a later article, the plagues were a completely different matter.  And there is evidence through extrapolation of events in Amenhotep III’s reign that a catastrophe of biblical proportions did take place.  Throw in the fact that the Exodus was led by a renegade prince from the Great House, his own son, and it is understandable that the events were stricken from Egyptian historical records as was the common practice for all embarrassments to the royal household.    Do we have an indication of any such son of Amenhotep that was erased from history, yes we do, because even with the best attempts to erase memories, there is always something overlooked.  And then in the article http://hubpages.com/hub/Rediscovering-the-Exodus-3 I quote from the Book of Jasher, “But the tribe of Levi did not at that time work with the Israelites their brethren, from the beginning, for the children of Levi knew the cunning of the Egyptians which they exercised at first toward the Israelites.”  And from this I suggested that the Levites were actually an Egyptian priestly caste that for reasons unknown threw their lot in with the Hebrew slaves at the time of the Exodus.  Conjecture would say that in some way, the Levites did something that offended Pharaoh and therefore lost any status that they once held in Egypt.   And sure enough, we have record of a priestly rebellion amongst the priests of Heliopolis that ultimately failed and was put down by Amenhotep III.  And then we have other stories, stories which I inferred in http://hubpages.com/hub/Rediscovering-the-Exodus-4 talk about Moses’ role in conquering the Cushites or Nubians.  A role which in Egyptian history is attributed to this disgraced son of Amenhotep III.  And there are other stories that state this conqueror of Ethiopia later rebelled against his Egyptian Pharaoh.  His punishment was never defined but we know that the man responsible was never caught or slain.  It would have been something that the Amenhotep III would have made certain never got recorded in his own royal chronicles.  And the pharaoh might even banish his son to one of the religious cities where it would be expected that he could do no harm.

Egyptian Clues

Much of the preceding events indicated will be discussed in subsequent articles, but more importantly we must ask ourselves, if Moses was truly a Egyptian Prince, a prince of the blood, did he leave us any clues to confirm this?  Because if we believe the great Law Giver was far more than the average slave, a man of destiny, of privilege, of intelligence then that part of him that was Egyptian would want to ensure that his life was never obscured; that it was immortalized no differently from those buried in their pyramids and royal tombs. The likelihood of his displacement, of his history being rewritten was already evident to him through the numerous insurrections, rebellions, and challenges he had to face, especially from those closest to him.   Knowing all this, then someone like Moses would attempt to leave a trail of evidence that would go unnoticed by most but for those taking the advice of an Anan ibn David, or a Kirkisani, they would search for the truth, the logic of it all, and they would find that which was purposely left behind to be rediscovered.  And just how would Moses accomplish such a feat?  He would do so by leaving this trail of bread crumbs scattered through the Torah, but so sublime that it would be overlooked completely and not recognized for just how Egyptian it truly was.  Something completely overlooked by those he knew would attempt to make revisions of the sacred book in the future.  And the obvious choice for a man raised and educated in the Great House would be to use something that no other culture had at that time and that was Egyptian mathematics.   The most extensive Egyptian mathematical text that we have available is called the Ahmes Papyrus or Rhind Papyrus dated to c. 1650 BC but likely a copy of an older document from the Middle Kingdom of about 2000-1800 BC.   This papyrus provides evidence of a mathematical knowledge that included composite and prime numbers as well as arithmetic, geometric and harmonic means.   Prime numbers are the key here since there is no known formula that yields all of the prime numbers and no composites. The distribution of primes, by calculating the statistical behaviour of primes was only modelled in a proven statement since the end of the 19th century.  So there use in ancient Egypt were intentional and could never have occurred randomly or coincidentally.  As I have always said, there are no coincidences.  And since the knowledge of Prime Numbers was exclusively the domain of Egyptian scientists, the high priesthood and the Royal Family, then their incorporation into the Torah would have been intentional.  And if intentional, then Moses was using them to make a statement.

Prime Numbers

On this premise, the inclusion of a string of prime numbers in the Torah would be the means by which Moses would be clearly pronouncing his Egyptian heritage. His vehicle for stating that he was raised not only in the Great House, but would have also attained the higher learning of the high priesthood. We know that the Prince Tuthmose was installed in the high priesthood of Heliopolis following his conquest of Ethiopia. A strange reward for someone that should have been hailed as the next conqueror and heir apparent. In the twenty-third year of his father’s reign, Tuthmose suddenly disappears, never to be heard from again. Two years later, Amenhotep’s reign ends. Far from coincidences but actual facts.
So where are these prime numbers? Placed exactly where they would go unnoticed because they would be hidden in plain sight. In the one book where Moses knew statements bordering on the fantastical could be readily accepted; that book being Genesis, incorporating the legendary stories of the ancient traditions. As Karaites, we learn from the Book of Genesis the morals and origins that shaped our civilization but as both Anan ibn David and Kirkisani stated, we must use logic and build our faith not on the literal translation but on the intent. As we read about the incredible ages of our ancestors, we have a choice; either accept them as actual ages or look for something deeper. Firstly, it matters little that Adam lived for 930 years or Methuselah 969 and but yet they are included in the Torah with no seeming purpose. Until we look at Adam’s age, made up of the four prime numbers 2, 3, 5 and 31. Each number unique and used only once. Just like Enosh, consisting of the two prime numbers 5 and 181, and his son Kenan consisting of 2, 5, 7 ,13, and his son Mahalel consisting of two prime number 5 and 179, and his son Jared consisting of three prime numbers 2, 13 and 37, and his son Enoch consisting of two prime numbers 5 and 73. This trend continues with Enoch’s son Methuselah, 3, 17 and 19, his son Lamech 3, 7 and 37, and his son Noah, 3, 11 and 29, and his son Shem 2, 7 and 43, and his son Arpachshad 2, 3, and 73, and his son Shelah consisting of a single prime number 433. From the above list, only Seth, Adam’s son has an age that does not consist of single use prime numbers. It would appear that it was Moses’ intent to highlight Seth as being different for another purpose. So out of a possible thirteen ages, twelve are purposely derived from the multiplication of prime numbers used only once. Clearly intentional and serving a specific purpose. Only when we reach Shelah who’s age is derived from a single prime number does the trend stop once more with his son Eber who’s age like that of Seth’s consists of multiple use of the same prime number. But Eber’s son Peleg consists of a single prime number 239, as does his son Reu, also 239. Clearly Eber was to be highlighted, framed between generations using only single prime numbers, an obvious change of trend from the previous ages. And Reu’s son Serug is a return to three prime numbers 2,5 and 23 and his son Terah once more only consisting of two prime numbers 41 and 5. After this we are in to the Abraham and his children and we no longer have a need to conceal any message in the ages of the patriarchs since Moses is aware that the knowledge of Abraham and subsequent patriarchs was already well established as would have been any legends regarding their ages. Eighteen generations out of which sixteen have been clearly manipulated to consist of prime numbers used only once.

In Conclusion

Whether you choose to believe it or not, the ages described were intentionally selected since you have a better chance to win the lottery than to have successive ages made up of single use prime numbers occur with such a high frequency.  Since the statistical formula for deriving these numbers, which again is only a probability formula and not exact, was only arrived at in the nineteenth century, then the author of these ages had an advanced knowledge of higher mathematics and was able to determine prime numbers, even one as high as 433 without the advantages we have of our present education.  So truly this was a person of exceptional skill and knowledge, but knowledge that only existed amongst a very elite in Egypt.
As to why highlight Seth and Eber from amongst all those other patriarchs, that too can be explained if I attempt to be so bold as to guess at what Moses may have been suggesting. If we look at the three individuals, Seth, Eber and Abraham, we have the three identifiable fathers of our people. Seth, who came into existence so that we would be his descendants and not those of Cain, Eber who fathered us as a distinct race, that being the Hebrew, derived from his name and the language he gave us, and then Abraham who’s own name states clearly that he would father a people that would be unique amongst the nations. Through the use of mathematical principles, Moses has made two very evident statements. Firstly that his origins were clearly Egyptian from that of the Great House but secondly that the parentage of the majority of the people he led were not. Our Lawgiver has spoken to us directly in a manner that only he was capable of doing. A message that he passed down through time so that we would have a better understanding of our origins.

A Karaite Questioning Exodus

Over the past twenty or so years I've travelled extensively, meeting and talking with distant members of the family that had become lost to my immediate family. Some of them thought they were the last of the family members, having lost contact with the other familial lines a hundred years or so ago. But what was most interesting was that even with this separation we shared many of the family stories and tales. Some are anecdotal, others historical, and others even border on the mythical. When writing Shadows of Trinity, it was from one of these encounters that the subject material of the story was revealed to me. Families are a treasure trove of information but too often the stories are lost long before one has the opportunity to write them down. Not only are they're entertaining, informative stories but they do provide insights into Karaism that I believe most of my fellow Karaites aren't even aware of because the identification of being Karaite comes entirely from a personal perspective. (See http://legendsofthekahana.webs.com for more stories) These are stories that have been layered extensively until they no longer resemble the original story. They are essential pieces of history that have been concealed. I guess it's come to the time that I no longer think they should be kept under wraps. So I might as well start with the first one from the time of our beginnings. No greater man walked this earth than Moses. His influence 3000 years later can be seen amongst those practicing Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. He changed the world but do we really know who he was? Forget the rabbinic version and I'll let you in on the secrets of the Kahana family. Anan ben David would reaffirm that everything we need to know is in the Torah. It's up to us to know how to read it and find the knowledge.

The Name of Moses
The fable about Moses's name being Moshe, in Hebrew to draw out, as in to 'draw out of the water' a reminder of the baby in the basket inference of the Torah was a Rabbinic creation. In their commentaries to the Torah, they admit it freely that they knew that the word 'mehshitihu' only had the barest resemblence to the name Moshe and that an Egyptian princess would not use the Hebrew language but they refused to admit what the name really meant. It was told through the generataions in my family that his actual name was always known to us but the rabbis attempted to conceal it because they felt it reflected badly on the founder of our people, our lawgiver, and also upon the man whom the rabbis tell us was his brother, Aaron. In fact, the stories in my family say that much of the original details were purposely lost in order to provide a wholly Semitic overview of the Exodus. The accidental dropping of a word here or there from the text in order to serve a 'Holier' purpose.

Perhaps I should start at the beginning of this tale and make it clear that this story is an extension from the teaching of Anan ben David that in order to be Karaite you must make your own relationship with the Torah. And in that respect I will anticipate a tremendous amount of abuse from the Rabbanites as they will accuse me of slandering the name of our great religious founder Moses ben Amram. So be it. They will also have to explain the changes that they made to Torah in order to hide some of the details of this story if that be the case. Their sins are by far the greater. They will understand when I say that it has to do with the elevated or lowered letter 'nun' in the Torah that they added and I will also reveal why they thought it was perfectly alright to add this letter whenever and wherever they wished. This story has a special place for me because when I was a youngster in Hebrew school, my discussions of this particular point of objection led to my caning by the Rabbis. Every classroom had a wooden pointer but I don't recall ever once seeing it used to point to something on the board. But it did crash down on quite a few heads, shoulders and especially knuckles of those of us that dared to counter the rabbi's arguments. In their efforts to knock the Karaite out of me, or as they would say the 'Dybbyk', accusing me of being possessed, they only reinforced that the stories handed down to me were true and that they were aware of them and intended to deceive us all in the process. Especially those Christians that had the Bible translated from the Hebrew with all these additional letter 'nuns' in place. They would never know that the sacred text had been doctored and would pass on incorrect translations. The letter 'nun' was a pictographic representation of Moses. When spelt out the letters look like a man bent in prayer and a righteous one who is upright. The perfect man of which it is written and none have come after Moses that can even be compared to him. The Rabbinic sages say that the letter also represents faithfulness and the reward for faithfulness. Again a reference to Moses. Nun is also said to be a pictogram of a snake which when used as a final letter becomes a straight stick, again a reference to Moses with his staff that was both snake and rod and which God gave him the power to change it at will in Exodus 4:3-4. To give it special significance the Rabbinic scribes will place a special crown on the letter nun (known as the tagin) when written in the Torah to say that this is the king of all letters. Nun also represents the soul and is used to designate the Messiah, the one who will come next that is most like Moses. And numerically it represents the number 50, and even the rabbis say this is to remind us of the 50 references of the Exodus in the Torah and also the 50 days of Omer or the counting of days between the Passover and Shavuot, when Moses received the Torah. So as you can plainly see, the letter represented Moses and by placing it as an additional letter in the Torah, the Rabbis said, "we have done no wrong, we are only making a point that this is what Moses would have done, or Moses would have said." Sort of similar to initialling a contract. And when caught, as I confronted the Rabbis, they confessed that they made certain to elevate or lower the letter so it could be clearly seen that this was not part of the word but a reference to Moses. But then they would read it and translate it as if it was part of the word and that was never picked up by the rabbanite Jews they taught as students. They had a new name for me. I was no longer teh student possessed by a dybbyk, I was 'Aher', the 'other', and they knew they were dealing with a Karaite that could be the bane of the existence.

So why is this letter nun so significant? Because of what the rabbis were never wishing to reveal. That the Nun was the actual name of Moses, or in its entirity he was Nunmoses. Similar to other Egyptian names you would have seen, such as Ahmoses or Thutmoses, but in this particular case Moses was named after the celestial river god, the god that spanned the heavens and fathered the other gods. The father of Ra and the one that Ra replaced in the pantheon of Egyptian gods. He was the primordial river and source of the Nile, hence it was he that would have spat out a baby in a basket into the river to be found by the princess. So when you read the words of the princess in Exodus 2:10 what she was saying was, "I called his name Nunmoses beacause I drew him from the waters of the Nile." ie. he was born of the river God Nun.

The Power of a Name
For obvious reasons, the reference to his being the "Son of Nun" as an Egyptian prince had to be removed from a religion that was dedicated to monotheism. The bible still preserved the reference when Joshua became Moses's legal heir, and new leader of the Hebrew masses. He in turn became the son of Nun but this time it was in reference to Moses and not to a pagan god any longer. Since Nun was not an Ephramite name, nor a common name of any other Semites in the Exodus as seen by its absence of ever being used again for anyone else named in the Torah, it was clearly an Egyptian name and one intended for a very specific reference. Its failure to ever be used again was deliberate.

But then again, what is an Ephramite name exactly? Why are we given names sometimes and not other times in the Torah? As my family ancestors have taught, there are no oversights in the bible. Every word is chosen for a purpose and the bible is complete. There aren't riddles or hidden meanings or even absences of information. It is why it was said that the Torah is the complete word of God and there are no other words necessary. That is the fundamental difference between Karaites and the Rabbanites. The latter chose to say the Torah was incomplete and there were all these additional oral laws that Moses never bothered to write down. And only through their wisdom, foresight and guidance could these laws be preserved in the Talmud. Well, if that was the case then why did Moses say that the Torah was the complete work of God and that it requires nothing further to be added? Either the Rabbis are right and Moses was wrong, but then if that was the case the Rabbis would be defeating their own purpose because if they declare Moses as having been wrong, then who's to say he was right about the Torah in the first place. So in fact they have condemned themselves by condeming the Torah. Bottom line is that the Rabbis were wrong and their insistence on the Talmud is also wrong and they have perpetrated the enactment of their own laws and their own agenda on the people. But back to my original story.

Since the Torah is complete and everthing we have to know is already written there, then we can read Exodus 2:1 and recognize that it was written for a specific purpose. It tells us that a man from the House of Levi took a woman of the House of Levi and they had a son. There is no mention of any other son prior so we must assume this was the first son they bore and therefore the first one that was at risk because of Pharaoh's order to kill the male offspring. For those that are now questiong where was Aaron, there was no Aaron in this house. The father is not named, the mother is not named and the sister is not named. An oversight? No, this was intentional. What was more critical was that these two people were both of the House of Levi. Notice that the word House was chosen and not tribe. Remember that in ancient Egypt, Pharaoh was lord of the Great House as the word Pharaoh translates. This House of Levi was a lesser house but still an aristocratic house. Which brings us back to the name Ephraim, first presented in Genesis 51:52. Shame on the Rabbis who have given us a false translation. "Fruitful in the land of my affliction?" The word was not fruitful which is 'poireh' nor is it fruitful in the conotation of being impreganted which is 'hephrayah' which is actually closer to the Hebrew word used. The word used is completely Egyptian and is 'ephrati' which means a royal aristocrat. As an ancient word it was even adopted into the Hebrew, but the Rabbis chose to ignore this translation. The only question is why they did so? The epherates in ancient Egypt were the districts the land was divided into. Over each district there would be an Epher. In the sense he was a pharaoh but not of the Great House; more like a governor. So what Joseph was realing saying was that he named his son Ephraim, A plural of Epher, because God had made him a governor in the land of his affliction which was a true and accurate statement. As master of the horse and vizier, Joseph would have been governor over all of the districts. His children would have inherited as Ephers and governed many of the districts themselves. Which brings us back to Joshua the son of Nun the Ephramite except the first time we are introduced to him is Exodus 17:9 and it is as if he's always been with Moses and he is not referred to as the son of Nun nor as being an Ephramite. He just is Joshua in the same manner that Moses was also first introduced to us without a father or mother's name. Moses refers to the two of them as a team as he instructs "Choose for us". These are two men that have stood together, shared their thoughts, and have known each other's moves for a very long time. The next time Joshua is mentioned is in Numbers 13:16 when Moses changes his name from Hosea to Joshua. Accordingly he is referred to as Ho-shua the son of Nun with no reference to the tribe of Ephraim. It is no coincidence that in the Egyptian pantheon the god Nun raised the god Shu from the primeval abyss. Shu represented the space between heaven and earth, a link between men and God. Shu was considered the son of Nun in Egyptian mythology. Egyptian royals bearing the name of a praticular god would often name their own children according to the pantheon. Is this merely a coincidence, that Moses is Nunmoses and Joshua is Ha-Shu both bearing Egyptian god names corresponding to a father and son? Or is this telling us more about the relationship between Moses and Joshua that makes far more sense from a dynastic perspective? Just in the same way that the Egyptian god reference had to be removed from Moses' name, so too did the reference have to be removed from Joshua's. And Moses we are told is the one that made this alteration to Joshua's name and in all likelihood he was the one to drop Nun from his own name.

Questions You Should Ask
Anan ben David was not opposed to questioning what was written in the Torah. In fact he encouraged it because he believed that over the centuries the Rabbis had dared to alter the sacred text rather than have the truth discovered. Truths which Anan believed would only enhance Judaism by the reader seeing human frailties and foibles. The rabbis on the other hand felt that the religious icons could not be seen with blemishes and attempted to conceal these by direct editing or instructing their followers that statements were merely metaphors that needed interpretation. Both practices were condemned by Anan and he believed that Karaites would be able to read the Torah and see the truth. We would not be deceived by the alterations and we would rejoice in the discovery of the Torah as it was origninally written. In that regard I ask you as readers the following questions just to emphasize the points made in this hub:

1. If Moses did have an Ethiopian Princess as his first wife, (See http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Ethiopian-Princess) then wouldn't it have been natural that he had children by her? Since Moses was a Prince in Egypt and his wife a Princess of Ethiopia, that child would be an aristrocratic royal by birth. Wouldn't that child be an Epher in the Egyptian language? Wouldn't that child have been a leader amongst the Israelites?

2. If Moses was the ultimate leader of the nation, then why are his children in the Torah purposely excluded from any authority of the Israelites during and after his death as it now readss, based on the information given to us? Or is it there but cleverly concealed and Joshua is his son by his Ethiopian princess and therefore a descendant of Moses did lead the nation as would be expected?

3. If Moses was of the tribe of Levi, just like Aaron, and they were brothers, then why is the entire priesthood given to Aaron's descendants and none to those of Moses? We know from the Torah that there was a constant struggle between Moses and Aaron, was there more going on?

4. If Moses' father-in-law Jethro was the priest of Midian, then his children by Zipporah, Gershom and Eliezer would be priests on both sides and more representative of religious cult of the Israelites. Why then are neither of his children given any role in the priesthood?

5. If Moses is in charge of picking his own successor, how is it that he picks a complete unknown who only appears once in the entire book of Exodus, yet in that one appearance the impression is given that he has always been Moses' right hand man? There was obviously a familiarity there that exceeded any great doings by Joshua prior to this event.

6. Why is it that the wording in Exodus in the early chapters refer to Houses, similar to the Egyptian connotation of Houses of the aristocracy and not to tribes? It says even the midwives were given Houses as their reward for saving the children. Only rulers could reward people with Houses in the sense of our knighthood. Who was this highly placed royal awarding midwives with aristocratic titles?

7. Why are the names of Moses' parents absent in Exodus II yet present in what is an obvious later addition by Levitical priests In Exodus 6:14-26? The repetition of 6:13 in 6:27 serves as a marker to not that the insertion took place between these two sentences; almost like quotation marks. The priest responsible was in a hurry to push the insertion through, giving only the generations of Reuben, Simeon and Levi and forgetting that there were at least nine other tribes that were to be brought out of Egypt as well. What was he covering up that he felt the insertion was necessary?

8. And even as a later addition, why does this Levite editor give the name of Moses' father in Exodus 6:20 as a conjunction of two royal Egyptian names, Amose and Ramses or AmRam?

9. And if Amram was the name of Moses' father then why is Amram marrying his aunt Jochebed in 6:20 which was a practice more customary of the Egyptian royal house? And how could Jochebed (Yah's Glory) be her name if worship of Yahweh hadn't been established until Moses received God's name much later?

10. And if Amram lived for 137 years according to Exodus 6:20, then why wasn't he present during the exodus from Egypt? His mother was and she was already much older than Amram being his aunt according to Exodus 6:20? So what is the real purpose of Exodus 6:20 if all it does is provide misinformation?

The questions are designed only to make you realize that there was an intentional effort to cover up the true history of Moses' origins. The additions in Exodus 6 that I pointed out were meant to be seen as obvious additions, the editor wanting his sentences to be discovered and not considered part of original Torah as handed down by Moses. But he in turn raised interesting issues concerning Jochebed and Amram, giving several hints as to their identity in the process. But these will be reserved for another hub at another time.