A Book Analysis of “The Exodus: Myth History?” (Part 1)

It has been over a month since my last blog post. The end of the school year and other of life’s demands sometimes prevent blogpost writing. But here I am—done with my spring courses, with my child still in school for the next three weeks. I have time to write a few blog posts.

Over this past semester, I was the advisor to a student who wrote her senior thesis on the question of the history of the Exodus. I have always tended to the belief that the Patriarchs account and the Exodus account are, at their root, about real history. Iain Provan’s book, A Biblical History of Israel, helped solidify my views on those things. Still, I never did an absolute “deep dive” into the nuts and bolts of those questions. In addition, a number of years ago, there came out a documentary entitled, Patterns of Evidence, that looked at this very issue of the Exodus. A lot of Evangelicals seemed to like it. A lot of people who hate Evangelicalism scoffed at it, lumping it in with the YECist crazy crowd. I never took the time to watch it.

Until now, because of the senior thesis this student did. I noticed I could watch Patterns of Evidence on YouTube for free (the real reason I didn’t watch it initially is because I am cheap and didn’t want to pay for it)—and it was pretty interesting. A lot of it was well-argued and intriguing. One of the scholars interviewed in the movie was David Rohr, who is known to question the generally accepted academic line concerning the Patriarchs, the Exodus, and the Conquest, and the chronologies that accompany all of that. As it turns out, he has written a number of books on these topics.

Despite my cheapness, I shelled out $20 on Kindle to read his book, The Exodus: Myth or History? Even though I cringed at the title (primarily because I feel he is using the term “myth” in the wrong way!), I have to admit that I found the book to be really fascinating and thought-provoking. So, I decided to do what I always do—write a few blog posts on it to help me solidify my own thoughts on the topic! And, obviously, I hope anyone who reads these posts finds them helpful as well. I imagine I’ll end up writing about four posts on the book. I hope you find the material worthwhile.

What is at Issue and What is the Problem?
I am going to say up front that this whole thing is really, really complicated. First off, it relates to a number of things related to the Bible: (A) The Patriarchs, specifically the time of Joseph and the time Jacob’s family moved to Egypt; (B) The length of time the Hebrews were in Egypt (the Sojourn); (C) The dating of the Exodus itself; and (D) The dating of the Conquest. Secondly, all of that has to fit into a coherent timeline that “jives” with (A) the rest of the dates of biblical history, as well as (B) a coherent Egyptian chronology (which in and of itself is pretty sketchy). And thirdly, there is that pesky issue regarding actual archeological evidence for any of it!

So, in order to see how all of that might or might not fit together, you have to be sure you have a good grasp on those three things in and of themselves: Israelite chronology, Egyptian chronology, and archeological evidence. Can I use my exceptional teaching skills to give an understandable and coherent overview of all that in a few short posts? Let’s see!

A 13^th Century Date for the Exodus (and the problem with it)
Some scholars believe that the Bible suggests a 13^th Century date for the Exodus. The reason for that comes from Exodus 1:11, which says that the “new Pharaoh” who enslaved the Hebrews had them build the storage cities of Pithom and Rameses (or Pi-Ramesse). Therefore, with the birth of Moses in Exodus 2, his growing up, his fleeing to Midian, and his eventual return to Egypt (in Exodus 4) to initiate the Hebrews’ exodus from Egypt, some scholars assume that the pharaoh of the Exodus was Rameses II, who reigned (according to the accepted Egyptian chronology) during 1279-1213 BC.

From that date of the Exodus happening circa 1240 BC, that would thus place the Conquest of Canaan beginning around 1206 BC (after 40 years of wilderness wandering). And, since we find, in Genesis 15:13, that YHWH tells Abraham that his descendants would be slaves in Egypt for 400 years—add 400 to 1240 BC, and you get an approximate date of Joseph, and Jacob’s family moving to Egypt, to some time before 1640 BC.

Here’s the problem with all that, though: There is simply no evidence of any considerable Hebrew/Semitic population living in Egypt in the 13^th century BC, no evidence of any kind of massive exodus in the mid-13^th century BC, and no evidence of any considerable “conquest” of Canaan happening circa 1204 BC or any time in the 12^th century BC.

Because of that, many recent biblical scholars and archeologists have concluded that the entire Exodus story—and by extension, the stories of the Patriarchs and the Conquest—must be nothing more than a fiction. That is the conclusion that Israel Finkelstein comes to in his largely influential book, The Bible Unearthed. This position is called the “minimalist” position. Got it? Good. Now, put a pin in that and consider the next thing.

Figuring Out a Biblical Chronology
Figuring out a coherent timeline for Old Testament history can be a bit tricky. Although we are told throughout I/II Kings the length of reigns of all the kings of united kingdom of Israel, the southern kingdom of Judah, and the northern kingdom of Israel, as well as the ages of the kings when they came to the throne, without any set chronological dates, it is difficult to plot out an entire timeline. Fortunately, we are able to get a few of those set chronological dates. For the purposes of this series, I’ll just highlight the major ones:

• In the Assyrian king Shalmeneser’s records, we know that he fought a coalition of kings at the Battle of Qarqar in (according to our modern timeline based off of the birth of Christ) 853 BC. In that battle, he notes that the Israelite king Ahab was killed. This corresponds to what we are told in I Kings 22. That means Ahab died in 853 BC, and since I Kings 16:29 tells us that Ahab ruled Israel for 22 years, we can calculate that he reigned from 874-853 BC. Based on that certain date, the rest of the reigns of the kings of Judah and Israel can be figured out.
• In addition, on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser, it is recorded that Jehu of Israel paid tribute to Shalmaneser in the first year of Jehu’s reign. Doing the calculations, that would mean Jehu reigned from 841-814 BC.
• Then there is another item we are told in both I Kings 14:25-26 and II Chronicles 12:1-9: that Shishak, the king of Egypt, came up in Rehoboam’s fifth year and plundered the Temple in Jerusalem. Well, since Rehoboam reigned from 930-913 BC, that would place Shishak’s attack on Judah to 925 BC.
• Finally, there is I Kings 6:1, which tells us that Solomon began to build the Temple of YHWH in his fourth year as king, and that was 480 years after the Israelites came out of Egypt. Since Solomon reigned from 970-930 BC, that would make the start of the building of the Temple around 966 BC. Add 480 years to that and you get…1446 BC for the Exodus? Well, that throws a monkey wrench into the proposed 13^th century date of around 1250 BC! But Exodus 1:11 says the Hebrew slaves built Pithom and Pi-Ramesse, and that would suggest the Pharaoh of the Exodus was Rameses II, who reigned from 1279-1213 BC! ARGH!

Okay, following all that? When it comes down to it, Exodus 11:1, some scholars say, indicates Rameses II was the Pharoah of the Exodus—and that would mean a mid-13^th century date for the Exodus. But, there is zero archeological evidence that supports that date, or the corresponding time of a Conquest from 1200 BC onwards, or any Semitic population living in Egypt in the 13^th or 14^th centuries BC. On the other hand, according to I Kings 6:1, the Exodus would have happened in the mid-15^th century, around 1446 BC. But then, there is no way Rameses II could be the Pharaoh, which would contradict Exodus 1:11.

Egyptian Chronologies and Ancient Near Eastern Ages
Two other items need to be thrown out at this time, so that you head can really start spinning. First off, when it comes to archaeological dating, archeologists have divided that past “ages” in the ancient Near East in the following manner:

• The Middle Bronze Age: 2100-1550 BC
• The Late Bronze Age: 1550-1200 BC
• The Iron Age: 1200-550 BC

Secondly (as we will become more familiar with later), there are the various Egyptian Dynasties that relate to all of this. According to the generally accepted Egyptian chronology, we have the following dates of the various Egyptian dynasties:

The Middle Kingdom (2055-1650 BC)
11^th Dynasty: (2055-1985 BC)
12^th Dynasty: (1991-1782 BC)
13^th Dynasty: (1782-1650 BC)
14^th Dynasty: (Lasted about 57 years; nothing much is known about it)

The Second Intermediate Period (1650-1550 BC)
15^th Dynasty: The Hyksos—the capital of Avaris in northern Egypt (1650-1550 BC)
16^th Dynasty: Weak rulers, not much known about them (1650-1550 BC)
17^th Dynasty: Thebean dynasty—the capital of Thebes in southern Egypt (1650-1550 BC)

The New Kingdom (1550-1069 BC)
18^th Dynasty: (1550-1295 BC)
19^th Dynasty: (1295-1186 BC)
20^th Dynasty: (1186-1069 BC)

The Third Intermediate Period (1069-747 BC)
21^st Dynasty: (1069-945 BC)
22^nd Dynasty: (945-715 BC)
23^rd Dynasty: (818-715 BC)

As you can see, the Middle Bronze Age largely coincides with the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period, whereas the Late Bronze Age coincides with the first part of the New Kingdom, particularly the 18^th and 19^th Dynasties. Finally, the Iron Age starts near the end of the 19^th Dynasty and covers things up through and beyond the Third Intermediate Period. All of that reflects the generally accepted, academic chronology of the ancient Egyptian kingdoms against the backdrop of the archeological “ages.” Put all that together, and look at this visual from Rohl’s book that reflects the overall chronology based on the assumption that the Exodus happened during the reign of Rameses II in the 13th Century BC.

Alright then! The stage is set! In my next post, I’ll start trying to tease out the argument in Rohl’s book, The Exodus: Myth or History?