Asking if anyone has a better theory is a dodge. It's not up to anyone to disprove your claims, it's up to you to provide evidence in support of them.

BTW, you're misusing the word "theory". What you're proposing is described by the word "hypothesis".

As to what's wrong with your hypothesis, here are a few points:

The Giza complex dates from the 4th Dynasty, approximately speaking around 2500 BCE. There is some evidence that the Sphinx may be considerably older.

The Biblical account in Exodus specifically mentions the treasure city of Pithom and the name Rameses: "So they put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh." Exodus 1:11.

Pithom dates to the reign of User-Maat-Ra, commonly known as Rameses II. Rameses II was the third of the 19th Dynasty kings, reigning from apporximately 1279-1213 BCE.

Notice the 1200-year anachronism?

In addition, the earliest (and only) identifiable reference to the Israelite people in the entire surviving mass of Egyptian written material is the "Israel Stela", which glorifies the acts of the pharaoh Merenptah (1213-1203 BCE), the son of Rameses II. There are some tantalizing references to a people called the "habiru" or "habiri" in the Amarna Letters, which come from the reign of Akhenaten (1350-1334 BCE), but these can't positively be tied to any particular people. Even if these are references to the ancient Hebrews, they would still date the Exodus to sometime in the 18th Dynasty.

The timeline just doesn't hold up.

In addition, the pyramids of Giza have been explored sufficiently to demonstrate that they are built with a core of locally quarried stone, while the "finish coat", some of which remains on the pyramid of Khafre, is of limestone from Tura. No mud brick involved.

Later pyramids, from the 5th and 6th Dynasties, were often built with a core of rubble and a stone facing, but not the Giza pyramids.

One of the best replies I've ever read 10/10

remove this post please, moderator(s).

or you get all kind of 'fingerprints of the gods' type bollocks on here.

no offence meant to the serious scholar who replied.

First I cannot see the uploaded image.

I do not think this is religius shit.

Third listen to the ancient wisdom through Bob Marley not the bullshit bible which is religiuos shit!

"Exodus..movement of the people
Don't let them
fool you, school you, rule you"

Bob is not on another ganja induced mad murderous raping spree when passing this meesage on... the mad murderous ganja spree being the propaganda and untruths of the media/school which also blurts out shit like

> The Giza complex dates from the 4th Dynasty, approximately speaking around 2500 BCE

What bollocks is this? There is *even* overwhelming archaelogical evidence to totally diproove this.

The true Israelites are not white.
The true story of Akhenaten is soemthing to follow up.
The true message is one of prooven pure wisdom.

Altough I like the rastafarian cult a lot (it is a cult indeed, what you call religious shit), your interpretation is weird to me.
The Rasta cult comes from 3 main influences : Garveyism (the return to africa), saddhu philosophy (imported with ganja by hindu coolies) and the old testament (what you call the bullshit bible).
It is a (very) young religion (it started around the 1930's).


> The Giza complex dates from the 4th Dynasty, approximately speaking around 2500 BCE

>What bollocks is this? There is *even* overwhelming >archaelogical evidence to totally diproove this.

Do you have sources to proove your statement ?

Sincerely yours

BurningHead