Is There Any Evidence for the Historicity of the Exodus?
Why believing the biblical account isn't unreasonable
This is a paper I wrote for the apologetics class in Bible college and any errors are my own. I hope that you find it informative and helpful.
The story of the exodus is central to the founding of the ancient Israelite nation and is reflected upon by many of the biblical prophets. It is the preeminent example of God’s faithfulness to his people and carries significant theological value in the Abrahamic religions. Practicing Jews remember this event each year during the Passover, and Christians everywhere have marvelled at this unique story. Yet most archaeologists and biblical scholars have considerable doubts regarding the historical reliability of the exodus account. Since no ancient Egyptian record mentions the exodus, it is often dismissed as a myth in favour of several other theories explaining the origin of the Israelites. Despite this skepticism, evidence is abundant for a historical exodus as credible scholars have argued.
Exodus mythicists frequently claim that if the exodus was such a momentous event in the Bible, there should be direct references to it in Egyptian sources. However, such an approach is problematic and fallacious, especially concerning ancient history. When looking for evidence of the exodus event, one must recognize that the marshy landscape of the Nile Delta in Lower Egypt is not ideal for preserving archaeological remains.1 The massive amounts of mud deposited by the Nile’s annual inundation have devoured mudbrick and stone buildings from long ago.2 These wet conditions make the survival of papyrus documents from this region nearly impossible, meaning many ancient records are lost. During the wilderness travelling, the Israelites would have used skins to carry liquids instead of stone or pottery vessels, making it understandable why there has been no discovery of material evidence from their journey.3 In turn, the evidence we are dealing with when speaking of the exodus is indirect but still provides definitive information regarding the exodus events.4 Even recorded information that remains has an obvious bias. Kings in the ancient Near East rarely recorded their defeats, as it embarrassed the nation.5 In addition, Egyptian records depicted the king in a propagandistic manner.6 Thus, a king would not memorialize a story about runaway slaves and the drowning of his army. Overall, it is crucial to note that the lack of evidence does not disprove the Bible. To say so would commit the fallacy of negative proof.7 As Kenneth Kitchen wrote, “those who squawk intermittently, ‘No trace of the Hebrews has ever been found’ (so, of course, no exodus!), are wasting their breath.”8
Before going into the exodus evidence, it is crucial to establish a date for the events. The traditional understanding is that the exodus occurred during the 13th century BCE and that the Pharaoh was either Ramesses II or Mereneptah. This date originated as a Jewish tradition in late antiquity, and C. R. Lepsius revised it in the mid-19th century once there came to be a better understanding of Egyptian chronology.9 The main reason for this date is the mention of the Israelites building the city of Rameses in Exodus 1:11, which was the new capital city of Ramesses II.10 After discovering the famous Merneptah Stela in 1896, the date narrowed to the earlier years of Ramesses’s reign.11 This inscription relates a campaign in Merneptah’s fifth regnal year in which he destroyed the seed of Israel, indicating that Israel was an established nation by 1208 BCE, which would have been shortly after their arrival according to the ca. 1265 BCE exodus date.12 Significantly, the name Israel contained an ethnic marker, showing that it was a distinct people group instead of a city-state like many other places mentioned in the inscription.13 The capital was also moved to the Nile Delta under Ramesses II, meaning that Moses and Aaron could easily visit Pharaoh as depicted in the exodus account. Even some scholars who do not believe in a historical exodus have said that this is the only time the exodus could have occurred. Well-known archaeologist William Dever has remarked, “The Egyptian Pharaoh is not mentioned by name in the biblical texts, although we now know that he could only have been the great Ramesses II.”14
Some have tried to place the exodus in the 15th century BCE based on biblical verses such as 1 Kings 6:1 and Judges 11:26, but the reasons given are scanty and rely on strictly literalistic interpretations of scripture. 1 Kings 6:1 contains a symbolic number, an example of an ancient Near Eastern temple dedication inscription.15 Four hundred eighty is the product of 12 and 40, two biblically significant numbers. The number 40 is often used in the Bible symbolically to refer to an indeterminate amount of time or a generation.16 An exodus occurring during the 15th century would certainly not allow for the quick travel of Moses and Aaron to the Pharaoh’s residence, as the 18th dynasty kings (excluding those of the Amarna Period) ruled from Thebes in Upper Egypt and would not have stayed in Lower Egypt with their family for such an extended time.17 Further archaeological evidence supporting the late date is the early dynasty 19 abandonment of the Semitic city of Avaris, where the Israelites resided.18 There was a continual occupation of the site throughout the early exodus time frame, yet the city became uninhabited during the reign of Ramesses II, and the biblical exodus account is the most likely explanation for the city’s disuse. Many other problems with the 15th-century date exist, so this paper will disregard that view in favour of an exodus during the reign of Ramesses II.
The toponyms in the book of Exodus come from a fixed historical context that allows scholars to use them to assign a date for the book’s composition. Exodus 1:11 names the cities built by the Israelites as Rameses and Pithom. Rameses from the Bible could only refer to Pi-Ramesses, “House of Ramesses.”19 The fact that the Hebrew text dropped the pi is not significant, as Egyptian texts sometimes left out the pi.20 It is located at the archaeological site of Qantir, two kilometres from the Hyksos capital Avaris/Tell el-Daba’a.21 This city first developed as a royal residence of Seti I but became the capital of his son and successor, Ramesses II.22 Such evidence strongly points to the exodus occurring during his reign as opposed to the 15th-century date, as the Israelites could not build the city before it existed. Pi-Ramesses experienced an abandonment around 1130 BCE, so the fact that the Pentateuch preserves this name points to an earlier date of composition than is usually held.23
A few other place names find their way into the book of Exodus that must be discussed. Pithom, meaning “house of Atum,” has been identified with the site of Tell el-Retabeh.24 The ancient roadway connecting it to Pi-Ramesses was 65 kilometres or about a two-day journey on foot.25 There are signs of a small occupation at the site in the early 18th dynasty, but significant expansions occurred in the 19th dynasty.26 Given that, it is probable that the enslaved Israelites worked on this building like the Bible records. Migdol, meaning “tower” or “fortress,” is one of the locations of the exodus journey mentioned in Egyptian texts.27 A place named Migdol was noted as a fort of the Ways of Horus on Seti’s reliefs at Karnak and is presumably the same one from the book of Exodus.28 There is a probable Ramesside site for Migdol, known as T-211.29 These and other toponyms used in Exodus fit best within a 19th dynasty context, especially given that Papyrus Anastasi III mentions some of them and dates to the third year of Merneptah.30 David Falk stated, “Most of the textual evidence for the Exodus toponyms dates to the 19th dynasty (1306-1196 BCE). The evidence suggests that most of the occupied areas mentioned in the Exodus account were either founded, renamed during, or hit their peak populations during the reigns of Seti I and Ramesses II, which is congruent with the assumption common among many scholars that the biblical exodus account is set in this period.”31
Moreover, the Pentateuch contains an unusually high number of Egyptian loanwords that indicate significant Egyptian influence. A loanword is a word from one language added to another, either due to the lack of an equivalent term or because the word has high favour.32 Loanwords are significant for the text-critical study of the Hebrew Bible because of their ability to serve as evidence for contact between people groups and their importance in dating biblical texts. Twenty-seven different Egyptian loanwords occur 381 times in the biblical narratives of the exodus and subsequent wilderness wanderings.33 This point is noteworthy because the rest of the Old Testament contains 51 Egyptian loanwords used 450 times, making them a much smaller percentage in those books than in Exodus-Numbers.34 While the birth narrative of Moses is comparable to Sargon of Akkad, this overlooks the many Egyptian words packed into this verse, Exodus 2:3. Papyrus, basket, pitch, reeds, bank, and Nile are all words borrowed from Egyptian.35 Significantly, all of these words except Nile are rarely used elsewhere in the Old Testament, which shows an Egyptian linguistic presence in this passage.36 Even multiple names of Hebrews in the exodus story contain Egyptian elements. Names of Egyptian gods such as Osiris, Re, and Horus exist in some of the personal names of the exodus generation.37 Another loanword example is hartom in Exodus 7:11; this word refers to the Egyptian magicians.38 Additionally, several loanwords are technical terms used for the tabernacle's construction.39 The high concentration of Egyptian loanwords in the exodus account points toward a writer with a knowledge of the Egyptian language, which is what one would expect if these books narrate a historical reality. Furthermore, some of these loanwords strongly indicate a date of borrowing in the Late Bronze Age instead of from the Iron Age.40 Although a few theories have been suggested to explain the usage of loanwords, the best and most logical explanation is that the Israelites were indeed in Egypt during the New Kingdom, just as the Bible records.
Further evidence of the historical reliability of the exodus is the book’s usage of Egyptian phrases and literary structures. One frequent portrayal of the Pharaoh in Egyptian depictions shows him smiting his enemies with his mighty hand and outstretched arm.41 Such imagery is used on multiple occasions in the Bible to refer to the exodus and shows the author’s familiarity with Egyptian iconography. In this context, the phrase is used as a polemic against the Pharaoh to show that he is no match for Israel’s God.42 The time of the 18th and 19th dynasties was the peak of the use of phrases such as “mighty/strong arm,” and the usage decreased after the New Kingdom.43 Even the well-known description of Canaan as a “land flowing with milk and honey” is used in Egyptian texts such as the Tale of Sinuhe and the Annals of Thutmose III.44 After the Egyptian magicians fail to produce gnats during the third plague, they comment: “This is the finger of God” (Exodus 8:19). Their words at first seem strange, given that they did not use the more common saying “hand of God,” however, “finger of God” is an Egyptian idiom, usually used for the gods Thoth and Seth.45 Exodus 15 records a poetic description of the exodus, often called “the song of the sea,” and commonly believed to be one of the oldest parts of the Torah.46 The poem is paralleled by the Kadesh inscriptions, which record Ramesses’s battle against the Hittites using prose and poetic forms.47 Many literary similarities exist between these two accounts, such as an unexpected attack from a large chariot force, an appeal to a deity, an enemy submerged by water, and praise of the king or God.48 Another intriguing detail is that the narrator’s omission of the Pharaoh’s name fits with the New Kingdom custom of not naming the enemies of the Pharaoh.49
When discussing the exodus events, we must look at the building the Israelites did during their enslavement. Since most of Egypt’s New Kingdom slaves were foreigners, this correlates well with what we read in the Bible.50 Exodus 1:11 mentions that the Israelites worked on building the store cities of Rameses and Pithom. The purpose of these store cities would have been to store food used for offerings to the gods.51 Since Egypt had a barter economy that did not use money, storing food was essential to ensure the continuation of offerings for temples.52 As such, the work that the enslaved Israelites performed was in service to the gods of Egypt.53 Likewise, the production of mud bricks mentioned in Exodus correlates well with what we know of Egyptian building projects. Mudbrick was used instead of stone to control the temperature for food storage, and there are records from the New Kingdom of foreign slaves making bricks.54 A depiction of this process finds itself on the walls of the tomb of the vizier Rekhmire from ca. 1450 BCE.55 Some Egyptian documents also mention a shortage of straw for brickmaking, whereas mudbrick in Canaan generally did not use straw.56 All this shows that the book of Exodus came out of an Egyptian context.
The narrative of the exodus as recorded in the Hebrew Bible shows a firsthand knowledge of many Egyptian practices and customs. Baruch Halpern has noted that “almost every detail in the [exodus] tradition mirrors conditions under the XIXth Dynasty.”57 Moses’s adoption by the Pharaoh’s daughter finds itself historically plausible due to Egyptian women having the right to adopt children on their own initiative.58 Exodus 5:14 narrates that the supervisors of the slaves were beaten and then questioned, a process that is the reverse of most interrogations. However, in the Egyptian mindset, beating people before questioning them would ensure they would tell the truth.59 In the plague narrative, the Egyptian magicians were unable to stand before Moses and Aaron due to being covered in boils (Exodus 9:11). This is interesting because, in the Egyptian context, skin diseases make a person unclean. Gary Rendsburg commented, “Egyptian priests shaved their entire bodies every day, to ensure perfect and hence pure skin, or else they would be considered impure and disqualified from temple worship. Priests with boils means no offerings in the temples; no offerings in the temples means distress for the gods; distress of the gods means chaos and collapse in Egypt.”60 Another intriguing detail is the description of the Israelites carrying their bread bowls on their shoulders in Exodus 12:34. Bread bowls from the Levant were low and wide, making this method of transporting them impossible.61 On the other hand, it is easy to carry Egyptian bread bowls on the shoulders because of their tall cylindrical shape.62 Even the foods mentioned in Numbers 11:5-6 are things the ancient Egyptians ate.63
Furthermore, the descriptions of the Tabernacle and Ark of the Covenant have striking similarities to many pieces of Egyptian ritual furniture. Many Pharaohs of the New Kingdom had wooden shrines overlaid in gold that are an interesting parallel to the ark.64 Shrines discovered in the tomb of Tutankhamun provide an example of what the ark would have looked like and date to shortly before the exodus.65 The ark’s design falls in a specific period of Egyptian history, between the reign of Amenhotep III and the end of Dynasty 20.66 Ramesses II’s royal war tent at the battle of Kadesh was rectangular, and the outer room was twice the length of the inner one.67 Depictions of the battle portray the proportions of the camp matching that of the Tabernacle, and the iconography of wings symbolizing protection is used on the ark.68 This design was in contrast to the Assyrian camps, which were round, and one would expect to see the Israelites using the Mesopotamian style for the Tabernacle.69 Even the wood used for the Tabernacle was acacia, a type native to the Sinai.70 Another interesting detail is that the word used for linen in the accounts of the Tabernacle and priestly garments is of Egyptian origin, despite the existence of a Hebrew word for linen that frequently occurs outside the Exodus story.71 Falk has written, “The cultural and geographic references point to an ancient writer who was intimately familiar with the area of the Nile delta and the customs of Egypt as they existed in the late New Kingdom, strongly suggesting the reliability of the exodus as a historical event.”72
A further objection that some people have to the exodus as found in the Bible is the impossibility of it consisting of around two to three million people. This view originated from the number given in Exodus 12:37 as 600 000 able-bodied men, and adding the rest of the population would put the total number in the millions.73 The idea of a few million people leaving Egypt to wander the Sinai peninsula during the Late Bronze Age is an incredibly unrealistic situation, given that Egypt’s total population during the Ramesside period was around 3.5 million.74 Such a group would have outnumbered the Egyptian army by an insane amount.75 Similarly, the biblical conquest of Canaan does not fit with these large numbers.76 As Hoffmeier has said, “Not only would there be serious logistical problems for millions of people camping and moving about in Sinai, but such a horde would have created a demographic disaster departing Egypt and arriving in Canaan.”77 However, the Hebrew word ‘eleph, translated here as “thousand,” can also refer to a clan or military unit.78 The context of the passage could indicate that “military unit” is indeed the correct reading.79 Another possible solution is that this passage uses an ancient Near Eastern military genre that exaggerates numbers. Either of these options would lower the number of people in the exodus to a reasonable amount, making the exodus and conquest a real historical possibility.
Even after discussing the above evidence, some will argue that the exodus cannot be historical because of the many miracle stories that appear in the Bible. Many scholars and laypeople alike reject the historicity of the exodus in part based on the supernatural events described, specifically the plagues and the parting of the sea. However, in doing this, they use a double standard in their treatment of the biblical text. Numerous examples of ancient Near Eastern texts describe historical events while simultaneously attributing the outcome to their gods.80 James K. Hoffmeier wrote, “the use of mythological language and images in a Hebrew narrative does not mean that a fictitious event is being described. In the end, those who consider the Exodus stories to be historicized myths, folklorist tales, or legends rest on assumptions about the nature of the literature that cannot be proven.”81 It is also possible that the plagues were natural phenomena that the Israelites and Egyptians interpreted as divine judgment.82 One may wonder how the Israelites could have survived the dry conditions of the Sinai for 40 years. The answer to this is simple; the climate has changed throughout history. Late Bronze Age conditions in the Sinai peninsula were more like a savannah instead of a desert like today.83 When taking the historical climate into account, the Sinai could sustain life, lending credence to the story of the wilderness wandering.
Assuming that the exodus occurred, the conquest becomes the next question. One must approach this question with realistic expectations, as the book of Joshua only records the burning of the cities of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor. The location of the city of Hazor is certain, and its massive size corresponds well with the biblical designation of it being the “head of all those kingdoms” (Joshua 11:10)84. It was an important administrative centre, given the significant amount of references to it found in the 17th century BCE Mari texts and the 14th century BCE Amarna letters.85 A fiery destruction layer at this site dates to the end of the 13th century BCE, which the excavator, Amnon Ben-Tor, has attributed to the Israelites.86 Such a fire shows signs of intentional destruction because of the disfiguration of many statues, an Israelite practice.87 Ben-Tor has said, “Canaan of the 13th–12th centuries B.C.E. was ‘ripe for the taking,’ and the early Israelites were in the right place at the right time. None of the other potential destroyers of Hazor can be held responsible. The early Israelites were in the region at the time, and they are the only ones who have a record of doing the deed. They should therefore be credited with having brought down Canaanite Hazor.”88 Since the destruction happened in the way the Bible described and at the time of the conquest, the most logical conclusion is that the Israelite destruction of Hazor mentioned in the book of Joshua was a historical event.
The other two main conquest sites are a bit more complicated. Jericho at Tell es-Sultan has undergone much excavation with inconclusive results. Some Late Bronze remains have been found at the site but erosion has significantly damaged these strata.89 Egyptian New Kingdom scarabs have been found at Jericho’s cemetery, which shows that the site must have been in use at the time.90 Although no Late Bronze fortifications were discovered, Jericho at this time was probably a small outpost, perhaps reusing walls from an earlier time, and it is thus inaccurate to claim that archaeology has disproved the story of Joshua 6.91 The destruction of such a place would leave hardly any evidence and still could have been a challenge for the wandering Israelites to conquer.92 Jericho’s mudbrick walls could have also eroded during the occupational gap from when it was destroyed to when Hiel rebuilt it in the 9th century (1 Kings 16:34).93 The case of Ai presents another challenge as its location is not firmly established. It is traditionally associated with Et-Tell, although there seems to be an occupation gap from ca. 2400-1220/1200 at that site94. That identification is based primarily upon the description of Ai in Genesis 12:8, which may or may not be the same Ai as the one in the book of Joshua.95 There is also an etymological connection, as both Ai (in Hebrew) and Et-Tell (in Arabic), carry the meaning “ruin heap.”96 Other sites have been proposed, such as Khirbet el-Maqatir, but that would require an alternate location for Bethel as well due to the biblical description of Ai being east of Bethel.97 A further problem with this identification is the absence of archaeological remains from the Late Bronze II period.98 Ai could be at Et-Tell, or it may lie elsewhere, but only further excavation can provide confirmation.
One other important archaeological site related to the exodus and conquest is the structure on Mount Ebal. Joshua 8 describes the ceremony of curses on Mount Ebal and records Joshua building an altar there. Excavations in the 1980s by archaeologist Adam Zertal uncovered a large stone structure on the mountain.99 This place is one of the many “sandal”-shaped enclosures in the Jordan Valley.100 There is also a four-room house on the mountain, a style that is generally associated with Israelite sites.101 Bones found at this cultic centre were analyzed and came from young male bulls, sheep, goats, and fallow deer, all of which were acceptable Israelite sacrifices.102 These bones were burned with fire and butchered at the joints, a sign that they are remains of burnt offerings.103 Before the expansion of the larger structure, a small stone altar was built inside the centre.104 Pottery analysis dates the inner portion to the late 13th century BCE, the time of the Israelite conquest.105 Although various theories have been proposed for the structure’s function, the excavators are confident it is an altar.106 Since this altar dates from the correct period and matches the biblical description, it is probably the one Joshua built during the Israelite settlement of Canaan.
Before concluding, we must discuss the composition of the Pentateuch. For over a century, Julius Wellhausen's documentary hypothesis has dominated Old Testament scholarship and influenced how scholars view these books. It remains a big reason why many experts in the field discount the possibility of a historical exodus.107 However, many scholars now question this theory and advocate for a unified Pentateuchal narrative composed earlier than previously thought. One reason for this shift is internal indicators in the text that provide valuable information regarding its composition. One such example is the personal names used, as all but four of the names from the exodus story are attested elsewhere in ancient Near Eastern texts dating to the second millennium BCE.108 It is strange for such a large amount of older names to be used if the Pentateuch was written during the monarchy or exilic periods. Such a late dating of the exodus story is problematic given the large amount of internal evidence that indicates a reliable tradition. Hoffmeier has said that these details of Egyptian culture and geography “would not and possibly could not have been known to the Hebrew author(s) had the biblical texts been composed in the seventh through fifth centuries BC.”109
As demonstrated in this paper, there is a large amount of evidence for the exodus that establishes a high likelihood of the historicity of the biblical account. Despite lacking contemporary records mentioning the event, some scholars have devoted decades to researching this topic and concluded that the existing evidence points to an authentic tradition behind the well-known story. There are indeed those who remain skeptical or are even adamant in denying a historical exodus, but the academic debate is slowly shifting away from their side. The exodus account has had a profound impact on the world through both the Bible and popular media. It is one of the Bible’s most memorable stories and has much theological significance to billions of people. Overall, the exodus provides a foundation for Israel’s origin, and reverberations of this monumental event leave an indissoluble legacy throughout the rest of the Old Testament as an illustration of God’s enduring faithfulness to the people he has chosen.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Beitzel, Barry J. Where Was the Biblical Red Sea?: Examining the Ancient Evidence. Studies in Biblical Archaeology, Geography, and History Series. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020.
Ben-Tor, Amnon. “Who Destroyed Canaanite Hazor?” Biblical Archaeology Review 39, no. 4 (July/August 2013): 28-36, 58-59. https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/39/4/2. Accessed January 14, 2023.
Berman, Joshua. “The Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II and the Exodus Sea Account (Exodus 13:17-15:19).” In “Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?”: Biblical, Archaeological, and Egyptological Perspectives on the Exodus Narratives, edited by James K. Hoffmeier, Alan R. Millard, and Gary A. Rendsburg, 93-112. Bulletin for Biblical Research Supplement Series. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2016.
Currid, John D. Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Books, 1997.
David, Rosalie. Religion and Magic in Ancient Egypt. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 2002.
Dever, William G. Has Archaeology Buried the Bible? Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2020.
Falk, David A. “Brick by Brick.” Biblical Archaeological Review 46, no. 2 (Spring 2020): 54-57. https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/46/2/6. Accessed January 15, 2023.
________. The Ark of the Covenant in its Egyptian Context: An Illustrated Journey. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Academic, 2020.
________. “The Egyptian Sojourn and the Exodus.” In Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, edited by Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton, 194-200. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2018.
________, “What Kind of Construction Did the Israelites Do in Egypt?” TheTorah.com, 2018. https://thetorah.com/article/what-kind-of-construction-did-the-israelites-do-in-egypt. Accessed January 18, 2023.
________. “What We Know about the Egyptian Places Mentioned in Exodus.” TheTorah.com, 2018. https://thetorah.com/article/what-we-know-about-the-egyptian-places-mentioned-in-exodus. Accessed January 16, 2023.
Halpern, Baruch. “The Exodus from Egypt: Myth or Reality?” In The Rise of Ancient Israel, edited by Hershel Shanks, 87–117. Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1991. https://www.baslibrary.org/rise-ancient-israel/0/0/4/exodus-egypt-myth-or-reality. Accessed January 15, 2023.
Hawkins, Ralph K. How Israel Became a People. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2013.
________. “Israelite Footprints.” Biblical Archaeology Review 42, no. 2 (March/April 2016): 44–49, 68. https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/42/2/5. Accessed January 18, 2023.
Hess, Richard S. “Onomastics of the Exodus Generation in the Book of Exodus.” In “Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?”: Biblical, Archaeological, and Egyptological Perspectives on the Exodus Narratives, edited by James K. Hoffmeier, Alan R. Millard, and Gary A. Rendsburg, 37-48. Bulletin for Biblical Research Supplement Series. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2016.
________. “The Jericho and Ai of the Book of Joshua.” In Critical Issues in Early Israelite History, edited by Richard S. Hess, Gerald A Klingbeil, and Paul J. Ray Jr., 33-46. Bulletin for Biblical Research Supplement Series. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2008.
Hoffmeier, James K. Ancient Israel in Sinai: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Wilderness Tradition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2005.
________. Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1996.
________. “Out of Egypt.” Biblical Archaeological Review 33, no. 1 (January/February 2007): 30-37, 39-41. https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/33/1/7. Accessed January 14, 2023.
________. “The Exodus and Wilderness Narratives.” In Ancient Israel’s History: An Introduction to Issues and Sources, edited by Bill T. Arnold and Richard S. Hess, 46-90. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2014.
________. “The Thirteenth-Century (Late-Date) Exodus View.” In Five Views on the Exodus: Historicity, Chronology, and Theological Implications, edited by Mark D. Janzen. Counterpoints Bible and Theology Series. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2021.
Janzen, Mark D. “What We Know About Slavery in Egypt.” TheTorah.com, 2016. https://thetorah.com/article/what-we-know-about-slavery-in-egypt. Accessed January 18, 2023.
Kitchen, K. A. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003.
Longman III, Tremper. How to Read Exodus. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2009.
Merling, David. “The Relationship between Archaeology and the Bible: Expectations and Reality.” In The Future of Biblical Archaeology: Reassessing Methodologies and Assumptions, edited by James K. Hoffmeier and Alan Millard, 29-42. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2004.
Millard, Alan R. “How Reliable is Exodus?” Biblical Archaeological Review 26, no. 4 (July/ August 2000): 51-53, 55-57. https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/26/4/6. Accessed January 14, 2023.
Noegel, Scott B. “The Egyptian “Magicians.”” TheTorah.com, 2017. https://thetorah.com/article/the-egyptian-magicians. Accessed January 19, 2023.
Noonan, Benjamin J. “Egyptian Loanwords as Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus and Wilderness Traditions.” In “Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?”: Biblical, Archaeological, and Egyptological Perspectives on the Exodus Narratives, edited by James K. Hoffmeier, Alan R. Millard, and Gary A. Rendsburg, 49-67. Bulletin for Biblical Research Supplement Series. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2016.
Price, Randall, and H. Wayne House. Zondervan Handbook of Biblical Archaeology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017.
Rendsburg, Gary A. “Reading the Plagues in their Ancient Egyptian Context.” TheTorah.com, 2015. https://thetorah.com/article/reading-the-plagues-in-their-ancient-egyptian-context. Accessed January 18, 2023.
Scolnic, Benjamin Edidin. “A New Working Hypothesis for the Identification of Migdol.” In The Future of Biblical Archaeology: Reassessing Methodologies and Assumptions, edited by James K. Hoffmeier and Alan Millard, 91-120. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2004.
Stone, Lawson G. “Early Israel and Its Appearance in Canaan.” In Ancient Israel’s History: An Introduction to Issues and Sources, edited by Bill T. Arnold and Richard S. Hess, 127-164. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2014.
Zertal, Adam. “Has Joshua’s Altar Been Found on Mt. Ebal?” Biblical Archaeology Review 11, no. 1 (January/February 1985): 26–35, 38–41, 43. https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/11/1/5. Accessed January 18, 2023.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 194.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 246.
Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 152.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 196.
Longman, How to Read Exodus, 69.
David, Religion and Magic, 281.
Merling, “Relationship Archaeology and Bible,” 33-34.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 246.
Falk, Ark of the Covenant, 11.
Hawkins, Israel Became a People, 64.
Falk, Ark of the Covenant, 11.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 194-195.
Dever, Archaeology Buried the Bible? 40.
Ibid.
Falk, Ark of the Covenant, 17.
Hawkins, Israel Became a People, 52-53.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 310.
Falk, Ark of the Covenant, 16.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 197.
Falk, “Egyptian Places Mentioned,” Online.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 197.
Ibid., 198.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 255.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” Exodus and History IV.
Falk, “Egyptian Places Mentioned,” Online.
Ibid.
Scolnic, “The Identification of Migdol,” 100-101.
Ibid., 102.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” The Route of the Exodus.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 199.
Falk, “Egyptian Places Mentioned,” Online.
Noonan, “Egyptian Loanwords as Evidence,” 50.
Ibid., 51.
Ibid., 53.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” Exodus and History IV.
Beitzel, The Biblical Red Sea, 19.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” Exodus and History III.
Currid, Ancient Egypt Old Testament, 94.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” Exodus and History III.
Noonan, “Egyptian Loanwords as Evidence,” 63.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 254.
Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 78.
Berman, “Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II,” 95.
Price and House, Handbook of Biblical Archaeology, 84.
Noegel, “The Egyptian “Magicians,”” Online.
Berman, “Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II,” 93.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 252.
Berman, “Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II,” 98-101.
Hoffmeier, Israel in Egypt, 109.
Janzen, “Slavery in Egypt,” Online.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 197.
Falk, “Brick by Brick,” 57.
Falk, “What Kind of Construction,” Online.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 197.
Janzen, “Slavery in Egypt,” Online.
Halpern, “The Exodus from Egypt,” Online.
Ibid.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 198.
Falk, “What Kind of Construction,” Online.
Rendsburg, “Plagues in Egyptian Context,” Online.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 199.
Ibid.
Currid, Ancient Egypt Old Testament, 145.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 278.
Price and House, Handbook of Biblical Archaeology, 95.
Falk, Ark of the Covenant, 165.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 278.
Berman, “Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II,” 97.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 278.
Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 211.
Hoffmeier, “Exodus and Wilderness Narratives,” 88.
Falk, “Egyptian Sojourn and Exodus,” 200.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” Logistical Matters.
Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 154.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” Logistical Matters.
Ibid.
Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 153.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 264.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” Logistical Matters.
Millard, “How Reliable is Exodus?” 57.
Hoffmeier, Israel in Egypt, 109.
Ibid., 149.
Dever, Archaeology Buried the Bible? 42.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 184.
Hawkins, Israel Became a People, 112.
Ben-Tor, “Who Destroyed Canaanite Hazor?” 30.
Ibid., 31.
Ibid., 59.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 187.
Price and House, Handbook of Biblical Archaeology, 109.
Hawkins, Israel Became a People, 104.
Stone, “Early Israel in Canaan,” 45.
Hess, “Jericho and Ai,” 38.
Kitchen, Reliability of Old Testament, 188.
Merling, “Relationship Archaeology and Bible,” 34-35.
Dever, Archaeology Buried the Bible? 37.
Hawkins, Israel Became a People, 109.
Ibid., 110.
Price and House, Handbook of Biblical Archaeology, 112.
Hawkins, Israel Became a People, 179, 184.
Ibid., 184.
Zertal, “Joshua’s Altar Found?” 31.
Hawkins, “Israelite Footprints,” 47.
Zertal, “Joshua’s Altar Found?” 31-32.
Ibid., 34.
Ibid., 38.
Hoffmeier, “Out of Egypt,” 30.
Hess, “Onomastics of Exodus Generation,” 47.
Hoffmeier, “Thirteenth-Century Exodus View,” Some Concluding Thoughts.
Rachel- Great topic. I’ve always been interested in Exodus as a book. You’ve asked and answered some of the questions I’ve asked in the past and I love how you approached the subject.
Good work, Rachel. Not an easy subject to tackle! And your writing is compelling and easy on the eyes.