Five Views on the Exodus: Historicity, Chronology, and Theological Implications

by Mark D. Janzen (Editor), Scott Stripling (Contributor), James K. Hoffmeier (Contributor)

Gain a thorough understanding of the competing views on the historicity, chronology, and theological implications of the exodus.

The biblical account of the Israelite exodus from Egypt is one of the most enduring narratives ever told and is a foundational event for several world religions. It resonates across cultures with its timeless themes of redemption and deliverance. It is also the only explanation the Bible gives for Israel's origin.

Despite its unique legacy, many scholars regard the exodus as fictitious or a cultural memory that may not be a historical event. Even among those who believe the exodus happened, there is no consensus regarding its date.

Five Views on the Exodus brings together experts in the fields of biblical studies, Egyptology, and archaeology to discuss and debate the most vexing questions about the exodus. Each offers their own view and constructive responses to other leading views:


Early Date: The Exodus Took Place in the Fifteenth Century BC (Scott Stripling)
Late Date: A Historical Exodus in the Thirteenth Century BC (James K. Hoffmeier)
A Hyksos Levite Led Exodus in the Time of Ramesses II (Peter Feinman)
Alternative Late Date: The Exodus Took Place in the Twelfth Century BC (Gary A. Rendsburg)
The Exodus as Cultural Memory: A Transformation of Historical Events (Ronald Hendel)
The Counterpoints series presents a comparison and critique of scholarly views on topics important to Christians that are both fair-minded and respectful of the biblical text. Each volume is a one-stop reference that allows readers to evaluate the different positions on a specific issue and form their own, educated opinion.

Genres: Theology, History, Religion, Old Testament, Ancient History, Nonfiction

304 pages, Paperback

First published April 13, 2021

Reviews

[Ben Torno · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book made me realize that I do not care about this argument whatsoever.

Stripling's contributions are awful; his entire argument is based on a hyper-literal reading of Biblical numbers (claiming that other interpretations make the Bible "dishonest") but somehow, in the next breath, he'll dismiss the Exodus reference to "Pithom and Raamses" as a later editorial edition?? Also, more nonsense about the Mount Ebal Curse Tablet.

Feinman's essay on the Hyksos/Levite Exodus is also one of the weirdest works of Biblical scholarship I've ever read. The entire thing is a wacky reinterpretation of three Egyptian texts that have, at best, a tenuous connection with the Exodus. His "smoking gun" is a Egyptian court tale where less than half of the work still survives. It is so speculative and unfalsifiable that it's practically worthless.

Hoffmeier, Rendsburg, and Hendel's essays are decent, but overall, it seems to me that Old Testament archaeology is a somewhat backwards field. Three (3) of the scholars cited *private* conversations with other scholars. There's a ton of weird internal bickering, for example when Hoffmeier and Rendsburg attack Hendel for being "anti-evangelical" and start airing their grievances with specific conference remarks Hendel made in 2013. Just why is this necessary?

[Daniel Hoffman · Rating 4 out of 5]

I didn't read this entire book. Honestly, the structure made it a bit redundant. Five scholars write an essay on their view of the Exodus, and after each essay, the other four write a response. So after about three of the five cycles, each author has already more or less expressed their own view, and you get the idea.

The first (Stripling) writes from a basically evangelical and inerrantist perspective. He takes a straightforward reading of the Bible's chronological data to argue for a historical exodus in the 14oo's B.C., which is the traditional view. He also makes several arguments that this date best fits the archaeological data. A second view, also by an evangelical (Hoffmeier), argues that the major chronological marker on which the 1400's date is based (the reference in 1 Kings 6:1) should be understood symbolically, and the archaeological evidence points to an exodus in the 1200's B.C. Though most of Hoffmeier's essay just argues for the historical reality of the Exodus, without being dogmatic about the date. The other essays take looser, generally more liberal views, some of which are so speculative as to be kind of uninteresting, honestly.

One main takeaway from this book, which is what I had already gathered from other reading I've done on this, is that the chronology and archaeology of the ancient world is actually extremely uncertain and susceptible to lots of conflicting interpretations of data. We have excavated so little of Egypt and Sinai, and what excavation has discovered is often quite incidental and ambiguous. No good reason not to take the Biblical account as it stands; though of course it too has to be interpreted properly.

I wrote an article on the topic of the reliability of the Old Testament some years ago. Linked here:

https://knowingscripture.com/articles...

[Julius · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book shows well how divisive Old testament exegesis and archeology, as well as talking about ancient history is.

The various different perspectives give a good dashboard to delve deeper into the subjects, as well as demonstrate how ancient texts and archeological artefacts have to be interpreted. To form a view based on the evidence, one has to guess about things we do not know, as well as argue against other interpretations.

In my opinion endeavors like this that bring together differing voices are great especially for people who are just starting to delve into the subjects presented. As one sees how multifaceted and how many opinions can be raised from the texts and artefacts, one should develop humility before the subjects.

The only minus the book has is its readability, which is very repetitive and thus arduous to read. This is by design however, in order to have the possibility to comment on others writings. If one accepts this and reads it bit by bit, the readability is much better in my opinion.

[Dustin Turner · Rating 5 out of 5]

Helpful resource on the different dates and views of the Exodus. It’s very academic so prepare for that, but informative!

[Eric Chappell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good for what it is. This really gets into the weeds. If that's your thing.

[Tim · Rating 5 out of 5]

I didn’t totally agree with any of the perspectives represented, but I really enjoyed the format. I also enjoyed the academic rigor which the presenters brought to the conversation. I can see becoming addicted to this series. Always love to read anything by Gary Rendsburg.

[Rachel Schoenberger · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a great resource for anyone wanting to learn more about scholars' various positions on the exodus. The first chapter centres on the early date of the exodus under Pharaoh Amenhotep II and is written by archaeologist Scott Stripling, who wrote The Trowel and the Truth and is currently excavating at Shiloh with the Associates for Biblical Research. His presentation of evidence supporting a fifteenth-century exodus was well-organized and straightforward, despite containing some inaccurate information. James K. Hoffmeier wrote the second chapter on the late-date exodus view with Ramesses II as the pharaoh of the exodus. Much of the content presented reminded me of his book, Israel In Egypt, as the main focus was establishing the historical reality of the exodus instead of arguing about the date. Although I enjoyed his contribution, I think that the egyptologist David Falk would have done a better job at supporting the late-date view based on the numerous points he has brought up on his YouTube channel. The third position was represented by Peter Feinman, who suggests a correlation between the Hyksos and the Levites and places the exodus in the traditional late-date setting. This was one theory that I had not heard of before. It seems strange to argue for the continued presence of the Hyksos in the New Kingdom, when in fact, there is much evidence to the contrary. Furthermore, conflating the Hyksos with the Levites is problematic at best and is not a natural conclusion one would reach after a close examination of the evidence. Gary A. Rendsburg believes in pushing the exodus date to the twentieth dynasty with Ramesses III as pharaoh. His main support is the great increase in houses built in Israel shortly after this time, which he attributes to the newly-arrived Israelites. However, his interpretation of the Merneptah Stela does not withstand criticism. The Bible itself indicates that the Israelites were going to live in houses that they did not build, so a large increase in housing is not a requirement for the settlement in Canaan. Chapter five, written by Ronald Hendel, takes the position that the exodus is merely a cultural memory and did not happen in the way it was described in the book that bears its name. Unfortunately, such interpretations are not uncommon in the realm of biblical archaeology and many continue to deny key events such as the patriarchs, sojourn, exodus, and conquest. Overall, it was informative, but I wish it was longer. There are many more things that I would have liked to see discussed in more detail such as the location of the capital and the different Egyptian chronologies used by participants. For those wondering, I take the position of a thirteenth-century exodus in the reign of Ramesses II.