Evidence for the Exodus from Egypt

Share/recommend this article:

Excerpt "Evidence for the Exodus from Egypt: The Sudden Abandonment of Biblical Rameses during the Reign of the Exodus Pharaoh" Continue reading

Explore
Related Articles
Support
Like this artice?

Our Ministry relies on the generosity of people like you. Every small donation helps us develop and publish great articles.

Please support ABR!

Visa, MasterCard, American Express, Discover & PayPal

The biblical narrative of an extended Israelite stay in Egypt and a spectacular mass exodus under the nose of pharaoh long has been the laughingstock of ancient Near Eastern scholars, as no evidence of any of these events outside the biblical narrative has been presented.

These days are coming to an end.

Dramatic and spectacular evidence both for the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, the exodus, and the first Passover is the focus of the book I am now writing, entitled: Evidence of Israelites in Egypt from Joseph’s Time until the Exodus and will contain an important contribution from ABR’s Director of Research, Dr. Bryant Wood. In preparation for the book, I just published an article in the secular, Egyptological journal, The Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections (5/2: 9–28). This article serves the ‘John the Baptist role’ for the book, offering no biblical references, but preparing the scene for all that will come. The following is a summary of what is found in the article.

An Austrian archaeological team, led by Dr. Manfred Bietak, has excavated the palatial district at Avaris (Tell el-Dab‘a) and produced some significant results for illuminating the Nile Delta’s history during the 15th and 18th Dynasties. While Bietak’s subsequent publications primarily have focused on the exquisite Minoan wall paintings and the site’s likely association with Peru-nefer, Egypt’s naval base during the height of her imperialistic thrust into Asia, much less attention has centered on the timing of the mid-18th-Dynasty abandonment of Avaris (= biblical Rameses) that Bietak says occurred “after Amenhotep II”, and was followed by an inexplicable occupational gap. Did the abandonment occur during the reign of Amenhotep II, at the end of his reign, or during the reign of Thutmose IV?

The present work will seek to bring together all of the relevant data—from the archaeological evidence at the site, the epigraphical record, and corroborative evidence from Theban tomb paintings—in an attempt to determine more precisely the timing of the mid-18th-Dynasty abandonment of the site (i.e. the mid-2nd millennium BC).

This article powerfully validates the conclusions drawn in the article I previously wrote on the identity of the exodus-pharaoh, which also is available on the ABR website. Due to the policy of JAEI, the new article cannot be uploaded onto the internet for random downloading. However, I am able to provide it individually to whomever I would like to give a copy.

If you desire to have a PDF file of this article, Toward Pinpointing the Timing of the Egyptian Abandonment of Avaris during the Middle of the 18th Dynasty, please submit your request to the ABR office by email and ABR will provide you with an electronic copy on my behalf. This article is not to be posted publicly on any internet forum or website. Doing so could jeopardize our ability to properly share this important research with Christians and sincere seekers. The article may be cited or quoted in a normal scholarly fashion in a manner that does not violate its copyright status or entail plagiarism.

 

Please pray for this article and subsequent book to successfully equip the church to defend the historicity of the Exodus and to demonstrate, once again, that critics of the Bible are grossly in error.

Yours for the King,

Douglas Petrovich, PhD Candidate, ThM, MDiv, MA

University of Toronto, NMC Department

ABR Associate

Comments Comment RSS

6/12/2013 1:57 AM #

Can you tell me how Gen 15:13 is referring to the slavery in Mitzrayim? How is 400 years of slavery possible if the affliction started with a King who didn't know Joseph? How many kings ruled Mitzrayim during the affliction period. If the land in Gen 15:13 is Mitzrayim then that means only two Pharoahs ruled Mitzrayim during a 400 year slavery period.

Larry - 6/12/2013 1:57:13 AM

6/15/2013 10:40 AM #

Larry,

I will do my best to answer your question, though I am planning to answer it much more fully in Appendix B (Defining the Precise Length of the Israelite Sojourn and Enslavement in Egypt) of my other 'in-process' book, Illuminating Biblical History from the Worldwide Flood to the Patriarchal Age.

Let me first of all say, "Well done!" for your question as to how a 400-year slavery is possible if the affliction started with a king who didn't know Joseph. How is it possible, indeed! The problem is that nobody who attempts to interpret Gen 15:13 has bothered to ask this question with any conviction. Once again, "Well done!!" Now let me take you into the depths, as Captain Nemo would say.

Gen 15:13 has been butchered in virtually all of our translations published in English, from King Jimmy's day until today. This can be seen in Paul Ray’s Bible and Spade article, where he misses the boat in one fairly major area, which is a common boat to miss, namely that the Egyptian oppression DID NOT last 400 years, or 430 years, or anything close to this. No way.

This common notion is the result of poor interpretation of Gen 15:13. The text does NOT say that they will be enslaved and oppressed for 400 years. Instead, it says that Abram’s descendants 1) will be strangers in a foreign land, 2) and they will work as slaves, and 3) and the Egyptians, though not stated as such, will oppress them. The “400 years” is a rough number for the overall Egyptian sojourn, not a limitation of points 2) and 3) only.

I do not have my tooled translation with me, but it’s best translated something like this: “. . . your descendants will be strangers in a land not belonging to them, and they (i.e. the Israelites) will work (i.e. as forced laborers, or slaves), and they (the Egyptians!) will afflict them (the Israelites): (all occurring over a period of) 400 years.” In reality, the enslavement and affliction lasted only (just under) 115 years.

My jaw almost dropped when I read how, according to Ray, the Hyksos afflicted the Hebrews (fellow native western-Semites, no less), and then that the 12th-Dynasty pharaoh Amenemhat III also afflicted them. Good golly, if Amenemhat III would have afflicted them, then the narrative of the last chapters of Genesis would need to be altered greatly, because Joseph long-outlived Amenemhat III. Wild! This part made me cringe.

But again, these are the kinds of wild extremes to which we can go to if we first make exegetical/interpretive blunders that take us down dark and dangerous alleys. You see, if we presuppose that the affliction lasted virtually the entire time in Egypt, then we’ll be looking for signs of affliction behind every bush. And when we don’t find them, we’ll create them!! Here is a snippet from my OT History class notes (that I used as a seminary prof in Novosibirsk):

“(c) Ahmose and the 'New King who Arose over Egypt'. Given that Moses was born in ca. 1526 BC, according to the calculations made after evaluating the relevant biblical and extra-biblical data, the 18th Dynasty figures into the narrative of the text of Exodus 1. The 'new king' who arose over Egypt, who did not know Joseph (Ex 1:8), undoubtedly refers to a king of a new dynasty, sometime after the 12th Dynasty was extinct. Moreover, with the compilation of the verbs, 'were fruitful', 'teemed', 'increased', and 'became exceedingly numerous', used to describe the vast growth of the Israelite people (Ex 1:7), a substantially long period of time between the generation of Joseph (Ex 1:6) and this new king is clearly implied. In fact, the 18th Dynasty, which is a mere continuation and expansion of the 17th Dynasty from which it sprouted, is the first native-Egyptian dynasty of any substance and strength since Joseph’s day.”

“Therefore, the advent of the 18th Dynasty is both the natural and proper chronological timeframe of choice for the reign of this new pharaoh. Moreover, the evidence is strongly in favor of Ahmose as this new pharaoh, as he engineered the transition from the fledgling 17th Dynasty to the mighty 18th Dynasty, even if it was only in embryonic form at this point. The biblical text notes that this new king was fearful of the Jews allying themselves with a foreign people who hate the Egyptians (Ex 1:10). What is known about these foreign people, beyond their hatred of the native Egyptians, is that they had fought against the Egyptians and departed from the land. As described previously, these foreigners are undoubtedly the Hyksos. Based on Moses’ description, the time of Exodus 1:10 must be within a short, 3-year period: after their expulsion in ca. 1560 BC, and before Ahmose exterminated them at Sharuhen, their post-Egyptian stronghold in the Palestinian Negev. So, what Ahmose feared was that the Jews, a massive group in number, would leave Goshen, join with the Hyksos, and return with them to suppress the native Egyptians in order to help them regain supremacy over the Egyptians and continue their dynasty. Ahmose’s way of preventing this set of events was to inflict hard labor upon the Jews (Ex 1:11).”

Make no mistake about it: Ahmose was the new king who arose over Egypt. And native Egyptians HAVE TO BE the ruling class under whom these dastardly events began. We know this for certain because when I first studied the text of Exod 1 to determine whether or not the new king might be a Hyksos dynasty, the text told me that this is impossible. From my class notes on the Exegesis of Exodus 1-12:

“Exegetically, a foreign ruler cannot be identified as this king because of what is found in the context after Exodus 1:8. In Exodus 1:9, Moses notes that this new pharaoh spoke 'to his people'. If a Hyksos king were in view, his people would have to be his fellow Asiatics known today as the Hyksos. Yet the subsequent text cannot allow for this identification. Pharaoh continued to speak to his people, saying, 'Let us deal wisely with them [the sons of Israel],' (Exod 1:10). Then Moses notes that the king’s people placed taskmasters over the Hebrews (Exod 1:11), afflicted them more (Exod 1:12), and with harshness caused them to serve (Exod 1:13). Yet in verse 13, the author clearly states that it was 'the Egyptians' who caused the sons of Israel to serve their overlords. The Hyksos never referred to themselves as Egyptians, and the Egyptians absolutely refused to call them Egyptians, instead calling them 'foreigner rulers' and loathing them profusely. Therefore, since the king’s people are specifically called Egyptians, and they are 'his people', the king himself must be Egyptian as well.”

So, the notion that the “new king who arose over Egypt” could even possibly be a Hyksos dynast needs to be put to rest, and buried without an honorable funeral. The notion of a 400-year enslavement also needs to be given a dishonorable discharge, and never allowed back into service.

Hoping that this helps,

Doug Petrovich

Douglas Petrovich - 6/15/2013 10:40:47 AM

6/15/2013 5:59 PM #

Thanks for the good news.

Pagan-Statists assert that the Bible's history is fictional until proven otherwise.

Why a people would invent a folklore of themselves which includes being slaves is a mystery.  The events surrounding their liberation from slavery are, like most of the Bible (in my view), beyond human ingenuity.

Since Larry posted a question above, perhaps I can also.

Experts say that there is no evidence for a world-wide flood in Egypt's records.  Some believers retreat into saying that the flood involving Noah was a local event.

Would you care to comment on this?  Thanks.
  

Lew - 6/15/2013 5:59:58 PM

6/23/2013 3:41 AM #

Dear M. Douglas Petrovich,

As you are writting a book about the Exodus, may I suggest you, if you are able to read French, my book entitled "Moïse, adoption & exil, les Israélites en Egypte et leur Exode". This book is available at TheBookEdition.com or at my e-mail-address. I wish you to be successul with your book. Best regards. Jacquy Mengal (Belgium).

Jacquy Mengal - 6/23/2013 3:41:00 AM

6/24/2013 1:44 PM #

Dear Mr. Mengal,

Thank you so much for the reference to your book on Moses' adoption and exile, and the Israelites in Egypt and the exodus. I will be glad to study your book, and hopefully implement citations of it into my book.

Thank you also for your kind wishes. I wish you the best in all of your endeavors, as well. Incidentally, my dear friend Peter van der Veen is Dutch. I hope that you know of him and his excellent work (published mainly in German and English).

Sincerely,

Doug Petrovich

Douglas Petrovich - 6/24/2013 1:44:29 PM

6/24/2013 4:25 PM #

Dear Readers,

In case you live in the Eastern U.S., keep a watch out over the upcoming months for an announcement from ABR. I am in discussions to put on a 10-hour weekend seminar in the Raleigh, NC area, which will be the first public presentation of these findings. This 'marathon' will be taped for a DVD set. The dates now being discussed for the seminar are Sept 20-21.

Sincerely,

Doug Petrovich

Douglas Petrovich - 6/24/2013 4:25:12 PM

6/25/2013 2:21 PM #

Lew,

You are welcome, and you are right that the typical approach to biblical history is that it has to be proven to be true before it is accepted. And even then, it is still pulling teeth with these kinds of skeptics. They will find flaws that do not even exist, . . . and then they will hang their hats on them.

You are correct that the believers who retreat into the 'local flood' position are merely conceding ground that they should never concede. To be honest, one must willfully disbelief clear suppositions in the Bible to turn a universal flood into a local one.

As for your question, I have yet to come across any statements in Egyptian literature that speak of a universal flood. Perhaps something is out there that I just have not seen. I would love to know of such a statement in Old Kingdom writings, in particular, but I know of none currently.

Having said that, I can tell you that many ancient cultures do document a universal flood, especially those that were in or around Mesopotamia. As of 1982, the number of known universal flood stories exceeded 270. Perhaps the number is higher now, and I just do not know what it is.

Among the most important ancient sources describing this event are 1) the Sumerian King List, 2) The Sumerian Deluge Myth, and 3) the Babylonian Deluge Myth. All of these are exceedingly ancient accounts, and they all contain elements of truth found in the inspired biblical account. When I teach OT History, we devote time to these comparisons/contrasts.

Given that the names of the "flood story hero" (our Noah) all seem to be different, the likelihood is exceedingly great that 1) the stories were codified BEFORE the alteration of language at the Tower of Babel (ancient Eridu, NOT ancient Babylon). Had the stories been codified after the ToB, the hero's name would have been the same, and 2) a strong oral tradition was passed down from the survivors of the flood to their prodigy who were given new languages at the time of the ToB.

This same oral tradition undoubtedly found its way to Abram, which was passed down to Moses. It is even possible that while in Egypt, the Hebrews began writing down the account of the flood, etc. How can I be so bold? When my Israelites in Egypt book comes out, you are going to see dramatic inscriptional evidence that includes captions written by Joseph's son Manasseh. Notes: 1) I am being completely serious. 2) Egyptian language is the first minor in my PhD program. 3) This is not sensationalism or wishful thinking.

I didn't set out to discover this, but God led me into these discoveries. I will conclude with a verse that has become VERY precious to my heart: "Joseph then answered pharaoh, saying, 'It is not in me. God will give pharaoh a favorable answer." (Gen 41:16).

Douglas Petrovich - 6/25/2013 2:21:59 PM

6/25/2013 2:24 PM #

Hello Lew,

Thanks for your Guestbook comments. Doug Petrovich has already supplied a good answer from an Egyptian perspective, and I cannot improve on that. I would only add that the way the Old Testament records the Flood event, to anyone who is willing to accept the text as written, precludes it from being a local flood. I recently wrote an article, "Insights from the Animal Kingdom on the Scope of Noah's Flood," that addresses some aspects of this. You can read it at www.biblearchaeology.org/.../...e28099s-Flood.aspx

Those who think a local flood is a valid concept have already rejected Scripture as the very Word of God, and placed something else - usually science - over it. The cure for this, I think, is a big view of God, which comes from cultivating one's relationship with Him through Christ. He is well able to do exactly what He says He did in the Word.

In His service,

Rick Lanser
ABR

Rick Lanser - 6/25/2013 2:24:08 PM

7/13/2013 5:59 AM #


Can you please explain or give the reference for your figure of 115 years for the actual enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt.

Many Thanks.

Ray - 7/13/2013 5:59:14 AM

7/13/2013 9:27 PM #

Dear Ray,

This is a good question. As I said to Larry, though, I am planning to answer this much more fully in (what is now) Appendix C (Defining the Precise Length of the Israelite Sojourn and Enslavement in Egypt) in my SECOND book, Illuminating Biblical History from Noah to Abraham. The needed argumentation is extremely complex, and a comprehensive answer is beyond what I can offer here. I hope you will understand this. At the moment, the appendix is only written in my mind, as it is. Please bear with me until the fullness of time allows for the process to work itself to completion. It will be worth the wait.

Sorry that this is all I can give you for the moment,

Doug

Douglas Petrovich - 7/13/2013 9:27:10 PM

8/12/2013 7:51 PM #

I am new to researching issues of the Exodus (and/or other biblical issues for that matter) and have just discovered that there is evidently no archaeological evidence that confirms the Exodus ever took place.

Would you please shed some light on this subject as I am very interested in the subject.

Most Sincerely,

Kent West

Kent West - 8/12/2013 7:51:14 PM

8/13/2013 8:46 PM #

Kent,

Welcome to the study of the matters related to the exodus. True, to date (basically) there is no published material that confirms the exodus ever took place. However, if you read my article on the exodus-pharaoh, also available on ABR's website, you will encounter a number of things that act as tangential evidence for the exodus.

Yet the majority of the evidence will only come out when my book has made it to and through a publisher, which will be covered in Chapter 3. This chapter is finished, but unfortunately it's time to see the light of day has not yet arrived. But believe me: there is nobody who anticipates that day more highly than I do. Hang in there with me.

All the best,

Doug

Douglas Petrovich - 8/13/2013 8:46:11 PM

8/14/2013 8:58 PM #

Thank you Douglas.

Since sending my email I read your article on the exodus-pharaoh and found it highly informative.

I am sincerely interested in purchasing your book as soon as its available. Is there a list I can be placed on for notification of when its available to the public.

I am somewhat new to all this but I love studying the Old Testament. Actually, it was the Old Testament more so than the New Testament that finally removed all personal doubts regarding the deity of Christ.

Thank you again,

Kent West

Kent West - 8/14/2013 8:58:48 PM

8/15/2013 9:03 AM #

Kent,

I suppose I should not have assumed, but just in case you did not order and read a copy of my JAEI article that is the precursor to the chapter (in the book) on the exodus and first Passover, you will want to be sure to request it from ABR. This, obviously, is the other best thing you can read for now.

I share your affection for the OT, and if you would like to read other articles I've written that relate to the OT, please go to my academia.edu webpage (http://utoronto.academia.edu/DouglasPetrovich) and download them from there. I think you will find them very useful, especially since you seem to have a love for biblical history.

As for the book, I wish there were a list to sign-up to purchase it. I actually do not have a publisher yet, but I'm working on it. There are two Ivy League UP's (university presses) that are interested in seeing sample chapters, as well as 1 UK publisher and 1 German publisher. I want to publish it in the secular arena if humanly possible.

Oh, and if you want to write me directly, my e-mail address is on the left side of my academia.edu webpage.

All the best,

Doug

Douglas Petrovich - 8/15/2013 9:03:43 AM

12/22/2013 3:07 AM #

Mr. Petrovich,
Praise God for all of your inspired work!  I am so happy I have come across your work & have been greedily soaking it in as my husband & children have fallen asleep around me!
I have long been fascinated with this topic, but have never had the time, nor the expertise, to research it like I would like to. Nothing that I have come across has seemed right to me before. I would really like to get a copy of your newest article.
I especially appreciate your use of Bible passages to back up your findings. I am a strong believer in using the whole Bible, not just bits & pieces.
I was researching Amenhotep IV because I have been really wondering about him, since I learned he didn't like the Egyptian god's & only worshiped one god. I just knew this had to be significant somehow. I came across your article that you wrote a few years ago & noticed you had learned about some new discoveries- including evidence of the Passover!
I am a homeschooling mom & really want my kids to learn history & well, everything based on the Bible & to see that it does all fit together!
So, thanks so much for all your hard work & for sharing your findings with those of us who are so hungry for this kind of teaching.
God bless you & your new book!
Sarah

Sarah Whitney - 12/22/2013 3:07:50 AM

1/10/2014 1:00 PM #

It has been my understanding that "The Sojourn" encompasses more than merely the enslavement in Egypt. 400 or 430 years would be an excessive amount of time between Abraham and Moses if they were only separated by 4 generations. In addition to the fact that Abram's calling occurred in Haran and not Ur as is so often mistakenly asserted. Not to mention that if taken literally, and I do, that Moses was 80 years old when the Israelites left Egypt, and that a generation in biblical literary form is 40 years then the gap between Abraham and Moses could not realistically exceed about 200 years or so. But for "Experts" to allegorize the historical accounts in scripture is to be intellectually dishonest.

Roger L Todd - 1/10/2014 1:00:51 PM

1/10/2014 2:23 PM #

Sarah,

Thanks so much for your kind words, which I greatly appreciate. I replied to you via e-mail some time ago, and since I have not heard anything back from you, I can only hope that you received it.

All the best,

Doug Petrovich

Douglas Petrovich - 1/10/2014 2:23:25 PM

1/14/2014 9:10 AM #

Roger,

First of all, let's start off with the good. Yes, self-proclaimed experts who allegorize the historical accounts in Scripture make a great mistake, including those who allegorize numbers in chronological passages, such as the "480th" in 1 Kings 6:1.

There are some problems in some of your other presuppositions, however, including this: "400 or 430 years would be an excessive amount of time between Abraham and Moses if they were only separated by 4 generations." The easy part is that "430 years to the very day" clearly demonstrates that Exod. 12:40-41 provides the definitive time of the sojourn in Egypt. The purpose of Gen. 15 is not to define exact numbers in advance, but to give round figures, which is seen in the "4th generation" expression, which also is a non-specific reference to a long period of time.

God was not trying to impress Abraham with specific numbers hundreds of years in advance. That's not the purpose; rather, the purpose was to give him a general outlook toward the future, which he would then pass down to his offspring. It's quite the ego-centric mistake for us to think that God uttered those words expressly for us, when in fact he spoke them to Abraham to give him a general forecast for his offspring's near-future.

This makes perfect sense. In the same way, for all that Jesus and the NT writers said about future events, God explicitly did not predictively state in what year the Day of the Lord would come. Imagine the pressure it would put on us/them!! Instead, Jesus warned against those who would predictively state in just what year he would return. Thus God is consistent in OT times with how he was in NT times.

The real problem in your statement is that you (unknowingly, I have no doubt) mistake the biblical characters who represent the points in time at the beginning and end of the 430 years. Abraham is NOT in view, but Moses is. Instead of Abraham, the time of his offspring's entry into the land is what starts the clock ticking.

The focus is on their PERMANENT MOVE to Egypt. This translates to the time after Year 2 of the faminine, during Joseph's time in Egypt, when his father Jacob moved his clan and all of their possessions to the city that we know as Rameses . . . and history (at the time) knew as Avaris (and later Peru-nefer, meaning 'Pleasant Journey!', which the city was renamed in the years leading up to the birth of Moses).

Therefore, the 430 years measures from the time of that entry into Egypt under Jacob (in 1876 BC) until the exodus under Moses (1446 BC). Once my book is published, this will be confirmed archaeologically and epigraphically, and all of these errant views of OT biblical history will be rendered obsolete.

The problem, of course, is not with you, but with those well-meaning Bible teachers who in recent generations misunderstood and misinterpreted the length of the sojourn and the events that signaled its outset and conclusion. Unfortunately, their well-meaning mistakes were published for others to read, who are unable to discern the falsehood in the argumentation and calculations.

Another problem in your statement is this: ". . . and that a generation in biblical literary form is 40 years". This is a faulty presupposition. Nowhere in the Bible does it define a generation as being comprised of 40 years. There is no need for reading something like this into the text, dear brother.

First of all, by stating this, we are judging by OUR standards, not theirs. In reality, we should not try to fit this to our understanding of a generation. It should be remembered that the length of the average person's life did not "normalize" until the time of the death of Moses.

God judicially declared (Gen. 6) that due to man's sinfulness on earth, he (God) would not put up with roughly a thousand years of this nonsense any longer, and man's days would be restricted to 120 years. This declaration was not fully realized until Moses' day, who died at 120 years. Abraham lived to 175, Isaac to 180, and Jacob to 147.

Therefore, for us to impose on the biblical text that a generation lasted only 40 years is presumptuous, and unjustified. It is far better not to be guilty of such imposition. Instead, the "4th generation" expression can imply a much longer period of time. In fact, if you find the biblical characters, you'll see that it was 4 generations from the youngest person who entered Canaan until the generation of Moses. I will have this spelled out in an appendix of my 2nd book.

As for the length of the enslavement in Egypt, please note that most English translations have mistranslated Genesis 15:13. The Hebrew text does NOT imply that the actual enslavement lasted for the entire period of the Israelites' stay in Egypt. Unfortunately, this sloppy and inaccurate translation of the Hebrew text is the result of modern translation committees who probably go wrong because 1) they simply follow the KJV (which actually says that only the oppressing will last 400 years!), and 2) they are too poorly versed in biblical/ANE history to even realize their need to critically evaluate how they translate this verse.

A better translation of Gen 15:13 is as follows: “. . . your descendants will be strangers in a land not belonging to them, and they (i.e. the Israelites) will serve them (the Egyptians), and they (the Egyptians) will afflict them (the Israelites): (all occurring over a period of) 400 years.”

The text does NOT say that they will be enslaved and oppressed for 400 years. Instead, it says that Abram’s descendants 1) will be strangers in a foreign land, 2) will serve the Egyptians, and 3) will be oppressed by the Egyptians. The “400 years” is a rough number for the overall Egyptian sojourn, not a limitation of points 2) and 3) only, as the NASV and other translations mislead us into believing.

In other words, the entire sojourn would last roughly 400 years, but there is no designation as to the specific length of service to the Egyptians or to the oppression by the Egyptians. The verb meaning “will serve” does not constitute slavery one way or another, though this type of service absolutely can be (and is) used of service by slaves. Thus the verb does not REQUIRE slavery inherently in its meaning.

Moreover, if we are (wrongly) going to take the 400 as requiring an affliction of 400 years, then Gen 47:27 (Israel's acquisition of property in Goshen and their becoming fruitful) becomes an absolute contradiction of Gen 15:13. But this is impossible if the Bible is not self-contradictory. Therefore, a proper understanding of Gen 15:13 reveals that the length of the oppression during the sojourn in Egypt is left vague and unspecified. This vagueness makes perfect sense when realizing that the 400 years is a vague number itself, as the actual length is specifically mentioned as 430 years to the very day (Exod 12:40–41). Vagueness on one detail in the verse lends support to the notion of vagueness with another detail.

And BTW, my research in Egyptology and in chronological synchronization of the two ancient cultures shows me conclusively that the actual period of enslavement was from 1560 (at the earliest) to 1446 BC, meaning a maximum of 114 years. This will become clear in my first book.

Hoping that this helps,

Doug

Douglas Petrovich - 1/14/2014 9:10:07 AM

3/4/2014 1:45 PM #

Hello,
I am currently taking a Bible class that is very steeped in the view that the Bible is not composed until the Babylon exile. I personally believed Moses wrote the first 5 books since he has the right training and that the Bible constantly mentions him as author.  But right now my prof is teaching that Exodus could not have literally happened because there is no archeological evidence that supports exodus in Ancient Egypt.  All I can find is that there might be evidence it happened in Pre Hyksos time period ( Through Answers in Genesis and Christian Answers. net, but the articles I am given to read says this argument has been debunked.  Is there any current evidence for Exodus happening in Egypt?  
Thanks so much
Sarah Rose

Sarah Rose - 3/4/2014 1:45:47 PM

Research RSS Feed

AddThis Feed Button

Recent Articles

Jesus spent much time on and around the Sea of Galilee with His fishermen-disciples. These disciples,...
For many years, Jericho has been a "problem" in Biblical archaeology since scholars claimed that there...
For many years, Jericho has been a "problem" in Biblical archaeology since scholars claimed that there...
Psalm 119 is an anonymous Psalm which stands alone between two separate groupings of chapters. After...
Associates for Biblical Research
  • PO Box 144, Akron, PA 17501
  • Phone: +1 717-859-3443 | Fax: +1 717-859-3393
  • Toll Free: 1-800-430-0008
Friend ABR on Facebook.com Join us on Twitter Join us on Twitter