Introduction to Exodus

By Brett Scollard

Introduction

Exodus is the second book in the Pentateuch. The central theme of the book is the redemption of the nation of Israel from slavery in Egypt. It shows the hand of God on behalf of His people in a powerful way. The supernatural aspect of this book produced two large effects. The supernatural captivates peopled thus making the book very popular and familiar to a great many people. The supernatural has also attracted a swarm of critics whose naturalistic presuppositions drive them to discredit almost every part of the book. The book of Exodus is also important theologically because of the great number of foreshadows to the plans of God. From Moses as a type of Christ, to the exodus as a picture of redemption, to the passover lamb as a symbol of the Lamb of God, the theological richness of Exodus makes it an important part of the holy scriptures.

Title

In the Hebrew, the title for the book of Exodus was the first two words of the book, which translated means "These are the names of." The Septuagint titles the book "Exit." This is also the title given to it's Syriac version. In addition, this title has survived in the English texts. It reflects the major theme of the book, which is the redemption of Israel from Egypt into the Promised Land.

Authorship

Tradition has attributed authorship of this second book of the Pentateuch to Moses. The Pentateuch has been a favorite target of the critics, so Exodus has not been without its share of criticism. A few voices before the fifteenth century questioned the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, but they were rare. These include Ptolemy and the Nazarites from the second century. Then there was an eight-century silence until the likes of Ibn Hazam, Ibn Yashush, and Ibn Ezra. From the fifteenth century through the seventeenth century, there was a steady trickle of criticism against Mosaic authorship. Then in the eighteenth century this criticism exploded and has not abated since.

Testimony of Scripture

The New Testament has many references to the writings of Moses. In Mark 7:10 Jesus quotes from Exodus 20:12 and 21:17 and attributes them to Moses. In Mark 12:26 Jesus, in quoting from Exodus 3:6, refers to Exodus as the book of Moses. It is likely that Christ had in mind the entire Pentateuch (or at least Genesis and Exodus) and not just Exodus; regardless, the reference still stands. Luke refers to the "Law of Moses" in Luke 2:22 and then expounds on this in verse twenty-three with a reference to Exodus 13:2, 12 in his parenthetical statement. There are many other references to Moses as the author of the Pentateuch that do not directly quote from Exodus in particular (e.g., John 7:19; Acts 13:39; 1 Corinthians 9:9). Additionally, there are many direct quotes and references to Exodus that show Moses as a participant but that do not directly attribute to him the writing of said event (e.g., Romans 9:15; Hebrews 11:23-34; 12:20-21).

In the Old Testament, too, there are many references to Moses, as the author of the Pentateuch (e.g., Joshua 1:7, 13; 8:31; 23:6; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 14:6; 21:8; 23:25; 2 Chronicles 8:13; 23:18). There are also direct references to Exodus that are credited to Moses such as Exodus 30:12-16 in 2 Chronicles 24:6 and Exodus 12:8-9 as found in 2 Chronicles 35:12-13. There are over 130 references in the Old Testament (excluding the Pentateuch) that include Moses in the events described in Exodus, or attribute either portions of Exodus, or the whole Pentateuch to his hand. The testimony of scripture is solidly on the side of Mosaic authorship.

Internal Evidence

Several passages in Exodus point out the fact that Moses writes down the words of the Lord during the Israelites' wanderings. In chapter nineteen, Israel arrives at the foot of Mount Sinai. In chapters twenty through twenty-three, Moses receives the law from God. Then in chapter twenty-four verse four it declares that Moses did write down all the words of the Lord. God commands Moses to write an account of the war against Amalek in Exodus 17:14. Moses also writes down the words of the covenant in Exodus 34:28 according to the command of God in verse twenty-seven.

One of the main assumptions underlying the documentary hypotheses is that writing was essentially non-existent in the time of Moses. Thus, Moses did not write the Pentateuch. What is clear, at least from the internal testimony, is that writing was indeed in use during Moses' time. Further, it seems evident from these accounts that, at a minimum, Moses wrote parts of Exodus.

It is evident that Moses did not write Exodus at a single sitting, rather, various parts were written at various times. Hence, there is a need to postulate some form of compilation; but whether Moses or another person put Exodus in its final form is not clear. There is no compromise to the essential Mosaic authorship if, say, Joshua were to do the final compiling or even add some scribal notes.

Finally, the background of Moses provided in Exodus reveals that he was eminently qualified to write Exodus.1 The first forty years of his life were in the Egyptian courts. His education, undoubtedly, would have involved writing. The next forty years of his life he spent in the desert where he could have gained great geographical knowledge of the area. During the wanderings, he certainly had an abundance of time. In short, what we know of Moses makes him a prime candidate for the author of Exodus.

Critiques of the Traditional View

Thomas Hobbes stated:

. . . for the Pentateuch, it is not argument enough that they were written by Moses, because they are called the five books of Moses; no more than these titles, the book of Joshua, the book of Judges, the book of Ruth, and the books of the Kings, are arguments sufficient to prove that they were written by Joshua, by the Judges, by Ruth, and by the Kings.2

Hobbes is correct, but neither can Mosaic authorship be denied on this alone. While scripture does refer to the Pentateuch as the books of Moses, this is more than just a title based upon their subject matter. As mentioned above, other authors of scripture take individual quotes from Exodus and attribute them to Moses. Certain sections in Exodus explicitly state that Moses wrote said sections. Early tradition is also quite strong in affirming Mosaic authorship. There is precious little in Exodus that lends itself to support the conclusion that Moses was not the author.

There are a few passages that many people say indicate a late date of composition, and on these grounds, they deny Mosaic authorship. These include Exodus 6:26-27, and 16:33-36. From Exodus 6:26, the argument is that the way the author speaks of Moses and Aaron indicates that they were dead. Contextually, however, the narrative of God's conversation with Moses (Exodus 6:1-7:5) is interrupted with a genealogy (Exodus 6:14-27). Verses twenty-six through twenty-seven then merely identify the Moses and Aaron of the genealogies with the Moses and Aaron of the narrative. If these verses are a finishing script to the genealogies, then their construction need not indicate a late insertion.

Exodus 16:34 is clearly out of place chronologically, but this does not by default make it non-Mosaic. It is not until chapter twenty that Moses receives the testament. This passage does seem to indicate a later insertion into the text, but there is nothing to indicate a post-Mosaic date for the insertion. As noted above, Moses would compose certain sections at certain times, and it is a reasonable explanation that Moses inserted this note as he compiled the book. Verse thirty-five appears to be part of this same insertion. This would place the final composition of the book at least at the end of the desert wanderings. Again, there is nothing here to indicate an insertion beyond the life of Moses.

Finally, verse thirty-six has a parenthetical statement that many think is necessary only if the composition is far removed from the time of Moses. However, this is not necessarily the case. In modern times, there are many reasons for the use of unit conversions. Different countries use different units, and a conversion or an explanation is often needed for the reader. Different trades employ different units. If the reader is of a different trade (and thus familiar with different units), it is quite reasonable to expect a conversion to a commonly understood unit. Thus, chronological distance, geographical distance, and occupational distance are all reasons to include unit conversion into a text. There is no reason to default to chronological distance as the only possible explanation. None of these "difficulties" speaks decisively against Moses as the author of Exodus.

The Confusion of Liberal Scholarship

While a full treatment of the views of liberal scholars is beyond the scope of this paper, it is worthwhile to consider briefly some of their work. Liberal scholars have had a hard time deciding on a date for the composition of Exodus. Critics rarely treat Exodus as an individual work. Instead, they consider it as part of the larger work of the Pentateuch. Some scholars place the Pentateuch in the time of Solomon (ca. 950 B.C.), such as the Catholic theologian Geddes.3 Others place it in the period of the exile (ca. 600 B.C.).Graff pushed this date even further into the post-exilic period (ca. 450 B.C. or later).4 Wellhausen then added his scholarship to the mix and concluded a final Pentateuch compilation around 200 B.C.5

Not only was the date of the final composition in question, the arrangement of the pieces were in question also. Initially the Priestly document (P) was thought to be the earliest, but was subsequently decided to be the latest of the documents. The Jehovistic document (J) moved from third to first and the Deuteronomic document (D) moved from third to fourth.

The date of the final composition was in question, the dates of the components were in question, and, the identity of the actual sources was in question too. Astruc initially identified four documents that he thought to be the original sources.6 Geddes and Vater found as many as forty underlying documents.7 Herman Hupfeld held to the sources as J, P, and D, but he claimed the Elohistic document (E) was actually the work of two persons.8 Gunkle postulated that the "documents" were not even the work of certain individuals, but were instead collections of oral accounts or stories.9 Seivers claimed to find five sub-documents that composed J, three that made up E, and six that made up P.10 Still others questioned whether E or P ever existed as documents at all. Von Rad reacted against this by trying to demonstrate that not only did a P document exist, but that there were actually two P documents.11

There have been periods where the majority of scholars held one view or another, but the word "confusion" would best describe the overall movement. There is never any view that holds approval for a long period without serious challenges made against it. The widespread disagreement (e.g., on the date of final composition) and the vast range of opinion (e.g., seven centuries) demonstrates that the "assured" results of higher criticism are anything but assured.

Date of the Exodus

Two dates have presented themselves regarding the date of the Exodus. The first is a date in the fifteenth century, and the second is a date in the thirteenth century B.C. There has been a great deal of debate over these dates, and both positions have a fair degree of merit to them.

Arguments for the Fifteenth Century

British archaeologist John Garstang excavated Jericho from A.D. 1930-1936 and presented evidence that the city had fallen before 1400 B.C.12 The city also showed signs of having been burned, which is in accordance with the biblical narrative (Joshua 6:24). Adding forty years for the wilderness wanderings brings the date of the Exodus to about 1440 B.C.

First Kings 6:1 says, "Now it came about in the four hundred and eightieth year after the sons of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD." This passage provides a date for the exodus based on the building of Solomon's Temple. If the fourth year of Solomon's reign is dated 960 B.C. then this puts the exodus at 1440 B.C.13

In his correspondence with Ammon, Jephthah indicates that Israel has been in Canaan 300 years (Judges 11:26). Their entry into the land is a reference to the conquest under Joshua. Jephthah's judgeship is dated around 1100 B.C. thus putting the conquest at 1400 B.C. and the exodus at 1440 B.C.14

In Acts 7:29-30 it states that Moses fled to Midian until Pharaoh died. Thutmose III (1504-1450 B.C. was one of only a few pharaohs who reigned forty years or more.15 While this may not positively date the exodus, its demonstrates that it is at least consistent with a fifteenth century date.

Merneptah was the successor to Rameses II.16 A stela (named after Merneptah) was discovered and dated ca. 1220 B.C.17 This stela commemorates, among other things, the defeat of Israel by Merneptah. This indicates that Israel was already an established nation at the time, which is consistent with an early exodus.

The Amarna tablets, discovered in A.D. 1887, are letters sent between the pharaohs of Egypt and various kings of other nations. These tablets date around 1400 B.C. Some of these tablets are requests for help against a people called "Habiru."18 It is very likely that this was a reference to the Hebrews and their conquest of the land. If this is accurate, then the time of the conquest is about 1400 B.C. and the exodus at about 1440 B.C.

The period of judges fit better with an early exodus. Assuming sequential judgeships, and adding on time for Eli, Samuel, Saul, and David, there is more than 554 years from the exodus until the reign of Solomon.19 There is only need for a slight compression in the judgeships if the date of the exodus is around 1440 B.C. However, a thirteenth century exodus would require an unacceptable amount of compression.

Arguments for the Thirteenth Century

Exodus 1:11 mentions the building of storage cities named Pithom and Rameses. The city Rameses bears the name of a pharaoh of Egypt. The first Rameses ruled around 1293-1291 B.C.20 It seems improbable that the exodus took place any time before the reign of Rameses I. However, an exodus in the thirteenth century is quite likely considering that Rameses II was a prolific builder.

An exodus in the thirteenth century places the patriarchal entry into Egypt in the seventeenth century. The Hyksos conquered and ruled Egypt from about 1720 to 1580 B.C. They were a Semitic people who may have been more likely to give Joseph a place of second in command.21 The mention of the "new king . . . who did not know Joseph" (Exodus. 1:8) would make more sense in light of the Hyksos expulsion which returned power to the Egyptians and perhaps led to the enslavement of the Jews as retaliation.22 Archaeological excavations at Lachish (Joshua 10:31-32), Debir (Joshua 10:38-39), Hazor (Joshua 11:10), and Bethel (Judges 1:23-25) have marks of destruction that date to the late 13th or early 12th century.23 This would match the approximate time of the conquest, shortly after the exodus.

Excavations done by Nelson Glueck in the 1930's indicate that there was no settlement in Moab and Edom until the thirteenth or fourteenth centuries.24 Yet, in Numbers chapter twenty, during Israel's journey, it states that Israel went around Edom since the king would not let them pass through. Numbers twenty-one and twenty-two also indicate that Moab had inhabitants at the time of the wanderings. Additional excavations in Heshbon testify that it had no occupants until the thirteenth century. A late date for the exodus allows for the habitation of each of these regions without any conflict with the biblical account.

Conclusion

The archeological data seems to favor the late date, and the biblical data better substantiates the early date. Proponents of the early date have provided answers to the arguments for a late date. Likewise, advocates for a late date have supplied answers to the arguments for an early date. Neither of these positions is set in concrete, and it seems best to withhold final judgment until a later date.

The Route of the Exodus

The accounts of the exodus in scripture leave many clues and seem to document fairly well the journey of Israel. The text furnishes the names of seas, mountains, deserts, and cities throughout the story. There is also a clear sequence to the journeys. At several points, there are time indications of how long they camped, or how long they traveled until the next destination. Listed below is the route from Exodus and Numbers.

The exodus starts with the Israelites leaving Rameses and traveling southeast down to Succoth (Exodus 12:37). In Exodus 13:17 it says, "Now when Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near; for God said, 'The people might change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt.'" They instead go by way of the wilderness to the Red Sea (Exodus 13:18). They camp in Etham at the edge of the wilderness (Exodus 13:20). God then has them turn back and go to Pi-hahiroth, which is between Migdol and the sea. This was located directly opposite from Baal-zephon (Exodus 14:2). After crossing the sea they go into the Desert of Shur for a period of three days before coming to Marah (Exodus 15:22-23). After drinking their fill at Marah, they journey on to Elim where God gives them quail and manna (Exodus 15:27). Elim is by the Red Sea (Numbers 33:10). From Elim they go into the wilderness of Sin toward Sinai (Exodus 16:1). They camp in Dophkah, then move on to camp at Alush (Numbers 33:13). They camp at Rephidim and war with the Amalekites before arriving at the Desert of Sinai (Exodus 17:1, 8; 19:2).

In spite of all this data, there are numerous suggestions for routes of the exodus. In fact, an overlay of each suggested route on the region in question would look like a plate of spaghetti. There are, however, two main routes that are the primary contenders: a northern route, and a southern route. The northern route places the crossing at a gulf of the Mediterranean Sea. The southern route has the crossing near the bitter lakes.

Most scholars agree on the locations of Rameses and Succoth, but the paths divide after that. Exodus 13:17 states that Israel did not go the way of the Philistines, which is the Mediterranean costal route. It is unclear what "war" the Israelites would have seen going that route. Some argue that the Israelites would have seen war from the Egyptians themselves based on several reasons. Pharaoh had changed his mind at several occasions regarding the release of Israel, and it was likely that he would do so again. Pharaoh had a significant portion of his army along the northern coast because of the "Sea People" who would attack Egypt from the Mediterranean. It would have been easy for him to send a message to this portion of his army in order to prohibit Israel's exodus. Others maintain that the text seems to implicate the Philistines as the agent of war. In either case, it is clear that the coastal route was out of question from the beginning. Thus, it would seem unlikely that Israel turned north at Succoth and made their "crossing" along the Mediterranean coast (the northern route).

The phrase "turn back" in Exodus 14:2 causes some trouble. It is unclear which direction they were going before they turned back. Albright argues that Israel headed south and then turned back north.25 He posits another "turn back" in order to avoid going the way of the Philistines. It is also possible that they went east from Succoth, and then turned back to cross at a more southern location (see figure 1). The Israelites enter the desert of Shur after their crossing, which fits a central or southern crossing better than a northern one. While it is nearly impossible to determine the exact crossing, the southern route seems to have more in its favor. After the crossing, most scholars agree that the Israelites continue in a southern direction along the east side of the Gulf of Suez.

Figure 1

Conclusion

The Hebrews, while a numerous people in Egypt, really didn't find their national identity until after the exodus. The book of Exodus provides an important link between the time of the patriarches and Israel as a nation. The Their redemption from Egypt is faithfully recorded by Moses.

Outline

I. In Egypt, ch. 1-12:36

A. Background Information, 1:1-22

B. Moses' Early Life, 2:1-25

C. The Redemption of Israel, 3:1-12:36

1. The Call of Moses, 3:1-4:31

2. Moses Before Pharaoh, 5:1-7:7

3. The Ten Plagues, 7:8-12:36

4. The Passover Initiated, 12:1-36

II. Journey to Sinai, ch. 12:37-18:27

A. The Exodus, 12:37-50

B. Dedication of Firstborn, 13:1-16

C. Crossing the Red Sea, 14:1-30

D. The Song of Moses, 15:1-21

E. The Water at Marah, 15:22-27

F. Manna and Quail, 16:1-36

G. The Water at Rephidim, 17:1-7

H. The War with Amalek, 17:8-15

I. Moses and Jethro, 18:1-27

III. At Sinai, ch. 19:1-40:38

A. Moses at Sinai, 19:1-25

B. The Decalogue, 20:1-26

C. The Book of the Covenant, 21:1-23:33

D. Covenant Ratified, 24:1-18

E. Instructions for the Tabernacle, 25:1-31:18

F. Idolatry, Intercession, and Mercy, 32:1-33:23

G. Covenant Renewed, 34:1-35

H. Construction of the Tabernacle, 35:1-40:33

I. The Lord Dwells in the Tabernacle, 40:34-38

Footnotes:

1 Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense, comp. Bill Wilson (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1993), p. 148.

2 Thomas Hobbes, "Leviathan" in Great Books of the Western World, vol. 23; ed. Robert Maynard Hutchins (Chicago: William Benton, 1952), p. 168.

3 R.K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament (Peabody, Ma.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2004), p. 15.

4 ibid, p. 19.

5 ibdi, pp. 21, 22.

6 ibid, p. 12.

7 ibid, p. 14.

8 ibid, p. 17.

9 ibid, p. 36.

10 ibid, p. 37.

11 ibid, p. 42.

12 MSU E-Museum, "Jericho," available from http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/archaeology/sites/middle_east/jericho.html; accessed 26 October 2004.

13 Harrison, p. 184.

14 ibid, p. 179.

15 Joel R. Siebring, "Thutmose III," Ancient Egyptian Culture Exhibit, available from http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/prehistory/egypt/history/people/tuthmosi.html#tuthmosis%20iii; accessed 26 October 2004.

16 MSU E-Museum, "Dynasty XIX", Ancient Egyptian Culture Exhibit, available from http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/prehistory/egypt/history/dynasties/dynasty19.html; accessed 26 October 2004.

17 Bryant G. Wood, "What has archaeology taught us about the origins of Israel?" available from http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a015.html; accessed 26 October 2004.

18 Harrison, pp. 318-319.

19 ibid, p. 178.

20 Dennis Bratcher, "The Date of the Exodus: The Historical Study of Scripture," available from http://www.cresourcei.org/exodusdate.html; accessed 6 October 2004.

21 Harrison, p. 170.

22 Dennis Bratcher, available from http://www.cresourcei.org/exodusdate.html

23 Harrison, pp. 176-177.

24 ibid.