A survey of standard Egyptian Encyclopedias and earliest mythology demonstrates Egyptian knowledge of Creation and the Flood consistent with the Genesis account.
The Table of Nations (Genesis 10-11) describes how Noah\u27s sons populated the earth after the Babel dispersion. We are told in Genesis 10:6 that Ham was the father of four sons (Cush, Mizraim, Put, Canaan). The MT Text of Scripture does not contain the name \u27Egypt\u27 but refers to this territory using the names of Mizraim and Ham. Scripture\u27s first reference to Mizraim as the Eponymous ancestor of Egypt occurs at Gen. 13:1, and following, refers to Egypt as \u27Mizraim\u27 652 times in the OT (cf. Genesis 50:10-11). Ham is referred to poetically as the Eponym of Egypt in Psalms (78:51; 105:23, 27; 106:22) describing Egypt as the \u27land of Ham\u27. Has Scripture revealed that Ham founded Egypt, and his son Mizraim succeeded him, as the first of Egypt\u27s Pharaohs? Gen. 9:28 reveals that Noah lived 350 years after the Flood, and Gen. 11:10-11 reveals Shem lived 502 years after the Flood (even outliving Abraham), and presumably Ham and Japheth lived to great ages also. Could it be that the Flood Patriarchal family were \u27deified\u27, and became the first gods of the pagan nations? (Cooper, 1995; Chittick, 1998). If so, would Egypt\u27s hieroglyphic language preserve a knowledge of the Patriarchs as ancient, deified ancestors, Egypt\u27s creators, who handed on their knowledge after the Great Flood? And is the Bible\u27s account of the Flood, the Ark, and Noah and his descendants, preserved in plain sight? The Creationist Flood Model would predict this, and I will attempt to demonstrate this to be so. My search will start with Scripture and continually be guided by Scripture. Firstly, the Egyptian language should be a more consistent and enduring guide compared to Egyptian mythology. MT preserves the meanings of Noah\u27s family\u27s names. Could it be that the onomatology of each name is preserved within Egypt\u27s hieroglyphs as a kind of linguistic footprint? In other words Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Creationism. Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship phonetically similar Egyptian words, carrying the same range of meanings as the MT would demonstrate consistency and deep linguistic connections with Genesis as real history.
I will review Egypt\u27s earliest creation myths to find any points of contact that may reveal consistency with the Genesis account, and Egypt\u27s preservation of it. I will show that Egyptian mythology has suffered \u27theological compression\u27, whereby the Creation and Flood accounts have been conflated. Once the connections are recognized, and teased apart, more evidence will quickly follow
