Firtly, most historical texts are regarded as first person accounts.
Dismissing all first person account gives a very different view of history. Usually archaeologists take first person accounts as gospel. Unless of course it turns out to BE gospel.
That being the case we have 1 first person account, and then we have folks like you who refuse to show evidence that the first person account is wrong, and suggest it is because archaeologists can't unearth evidence of something occuring that long ago.
How is this a response to my post? You gave a link that, as far as I could see, did not give evidence of an exodus. I would like you to explain how that link proves your point.
"That being the case we have 1 first person account, and then we have folks like you who refuse to show evidence that the first person account is wrong, and suggest it is because archaeologists can't unearth evidence of something occuring that long ago.
It is not our responsibility to show the account is wrong, it is up to you (or Biblical scholars) to show it is true.
There needs to be more than one first person account. There needs to be some other verification, such as Egyptian records.