I didn’t argue that Semitic people were not present in ancient times.  I basically said that the Old Testament account is not historically reliable.  

Bringing up the Hyksos is basically admitting that the literal history differs considerable from the account given of the exodus.  

What you are suggesting by introducing the Hyksos is that the exodus is accurate about the size and significance of ancient Egypt and that this place known as Egypt had a community of shepherds, but that’s about it.  There is evidence of pontius Pilate outside of the New Testament too.   What’s your point and how are you trying to use the Hyksos to prove what appears to be an argument in favor of the innerancy of the Old Testament?

Is the innerancy of the Old Testament the foundation that you are building your theory about the historical Jesus?