Product Description

Scholars of the Hebrew Bible have in the last decade begun to question the historical accuracy of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, as described in the book of Exodus. The reason for the rejection of the exodus tradition is said to be the lack of historical and archaeological evidence in Egypt. Those advancing these claims, however, are not specialists in the study of Egyptian history, culture, and archaeology. In this pioneering book, James Hoffmeier examines the most current Egyptological evidence and argues that it supports the biblical record concerning Israel in Egypt.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #260935 in Books
• Published on: 1999-03-18
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 280 pages

Review

"This is historical research at its best, with constant attention to primary sources...[Hoffmeier] retains a broad perspective and leaves no stone unturned in his quest to have the epigraphic and archeological evidence shed light on the biblical record of Israel's sojourn in and exodus from Egypt."--Gary Rendsburg, Cornell University

About the Author

James K. Hoffmeier is Professor of Bible Studies and Archaeology at Wheaton College, Illinois.

Customer Reviews

Archeological correlation with the Bible
An excellent, readable and rational argument for the historicity of the Genesis,and Exodus stories of the Bible from an archeological view point.

Quite a dissapointlemt
I had hoped this book would finally provide some evidence for the belief that the ancient Hebrews were enslaved by Egypt and/or existed as a group in Egypt for any appreciable amount of time--- as the book "Exodus" in the Hebrew Testament claims.

Sadly, this book failed to make a convincing argument for that claim.

First off, the synopsis for this book reads "Scholars of the Hebrew Bible have in the last decade begun to question the historical accuracy of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, as described in the book of Exodus." That is not quite accurate: historians, Egyptologists, and Bible scholars have been critical of the claim that the Hebrews were enslaved by Egypt for over 100 years, not merely a "decade." See for example Robert Green Ingersoll's text "Some Mistakes of Moses."

This book contends that the Hebrews really were enslaved by Egypt, but that fact has either been "lost" to historians or has been "hidden" from historians.... and that one must infer the existence of the ancient Hebrews in Egypt.

There are a nearly infinite number of flaws with that contention. The major one is, if the Hebrew Testament had not mentioned the alleged Hebrew enslavement in Egypt, nobody would ever think it had happened based upon evidence: the belief must come first, and then proponents of the claim strive mightily to find any and all possible "just so stories" to defend that believe.... no matter how absurd and tenuous. That is what the author of this book has done.

It is entirely possible that the book of "Exodus" in the Hebrew Testament is factual and that the ancient Hebrews really were enslaved by Egypt: however, this book offers nothing in the way of evidence that will convince a historian or an Egyptologist.

Did the Exodus really happen?
Did the Exodus really happen?

This question beats at the heart of this interesting book. In resolving his answer in the affirmative Hoffmeier discusses linguistic similarities and historical happenstances that support the view that the Exodus really did occur.

And to be sure, there is strong evidence that Judaism did indeed pick up many traditions previously common to Egyptian religion such as circumcision and not dining with foreigners (for dietary reasons). Likewise, the fact that Torah -- argued written in its final form after the exilic period contains accurate references to Pi Ramses and Pi Thom, cities that flourished several centuries earlier. What's more, the account that Moses was raised in Pharoah's nursery or that semites really could rise to high positions in Egyptian polity is not implausible.

However, these considerations are separate and apart from adducing, based on the best available evidence what really did happen and did occur.

Since Hoffmeier used it in his analysis, let's revisit the Merneptah Stele. The Meneptah Stele -- discovered by Flinders Petri in 1896 -- was originally created by Pharoah Merneptah around 1215 BCE to commemorate his campaign of conquest.

In pertinent parts, he recounts his raids against the peoples of the Levant:

"Desolation is for Tehenu;
Hatti is pacified;
Plundered is the Canaan
with every evil;

Carried off is Ashekelon;
seized upon is Gezer;
Yanoam is made as that
which does not exist;

Israel is laid waste;
his seed is not;
Hurru is become a widow
for Egypt

All lands together they
are pacified."

For Hoffmeier it was significant that the Stele both referred to Israel and referred to them using the heiroglyph for "a people" rather than "a land" or established country. However, a fairer analysis is to examine the reference in context. That is the "people" Israel are referred to in connection with Ashkelon (located near modern Tel Aviv), Gezer (located near central Israel), Yanoam (located near the Sea of Galilee) and Israel and Canaan (itself obviously in the Levant). In other words, in describing the people Israel the Merneptah Stele places them squarely in the middle of the Canaan.

And significantly, the bible puts them in the same place. In the Song of the Sea at Exodus 15: 14 through 16, the Bible says:

"People heard -- they shuddered
Shaking seized Philistia's
residents
Then Edom's chiefs were terried.
Trembling seized them.
All Canaan melted."

Again we see repeated the theme that the Exodus is not placed near Egypt but rather squarely in the Levant.

And this view is significantly boltered by the fact that linquistic analysis of Exodus 15 puts it as having been written around the 13th century BCE...the same time as the Merneptah Stele. (As to the dating of Exodus 15 see The Bible With Sources Revealed by Richard Friedman and Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic by Frank Moore Cross.)

The view that there was no actual biblical Exodus is further supported by the biblical archeological community. See Who Were the Israelites and Where did they Come From by William Dever and the controversial but similar The Bible Unearthed by Israel Finkelstein. Indeed this lack of historical evidence is even conceded by Hoffmeier himself.

For his part though, Hoffmeier focuses on the issues outlined at the outset respecting the Jewish/Egyptian similarities and what they bode relative to historical findings. In each case, other explanations can be offered:

1) For the Jewish similarities of circumcision and dietary customs, other cultures extending as far as the far east used both circumcision and solitary dining practices as incidents of religious practice;

2) For the linguistic similarities, it is not uncommon for geographically connected cultures to be familiar with and use loan words from other local cultures;

3) For the accounts of Pi Ramases and Pi Thom again it wouldn't be suprising for vasal peoples to be aware of power centers in a dominant country like Egypt certainly was during the reign of Ramses II The Great.

4) Likewise the fact that semites were in residence during the Hyksos period several hundred years prior to the writing of the Merneptah Stele and the Song of the Sea is of dubious relevance in uncovering Bible origins.

All told a fair reading of history demands at least skepticism and at most outright disbelief in the actual Exodus. That being said, it also bears repeating that matters of faith can and never should rise and fall with the contents of an archeological shovel.

All these things being said, Hoffmeier presents perhaps the best Israel in Egypt argument and his book is interesting reading.