[algol]

The Egyptian historical record is indeed vast, but it isn't seamless or without holes. Further, the Egyptian historical record was recorded by the Egyptians who, as with most societies, were unlikely to record (at least, not truthfully) events that cast them in a bad light. (Baghdad Bob, anyone?)

It's an absence of evidence, not evidence of absence.

[Dog Gone]

That seems logical, but there are some problems with that. The Egyptians didn't seem to record any existence of Jewish slaves even prior to this time when things were great, and they did record other setbacks to their kingdom.

Even the Jews recorded their defeat by the Babylonians and their forced exile, something which they might like to forget.

I'm not an expert on Egyptian history, but I am pretty well versed on the biblical version. While I used to believe that every word of the early books of the Bible is literally true, I'm now of the opinion that what we see is that the these books recorded the verbal history which had been passed down through the generations until such time as they were written.

I don't think it matters in the great scheme of things whether the Exodus story is accurate or not. It does, certainly, to those who believe that every word of the Bible was dictated directly by God.