Grace Theological
Journal 12.1 (Winter, 1971) 18-35.
Copyright © 1961 by Grace Theological
Seminary. Cited with permission.
THE LENGTH OF
lSRAEL'S SOJOURN IN EGYPT
JACK
R. RIGGS
Associate
Professor of Bible
The chronological framework of Biblical
events from the time of
Abraham to
David rests upon two pivotal texts of Scripture. The first
is I Kings
6:1, which dates the Exodus from
fourth year
of Solomon.
The second pivotal date for the Biblical
chronology of this period
is Exodus
12:40 which dates the arrival of Jacob's family in
before the
Exodus.
The purpose of this paper will be to
discuss the problem of the
length of
already
suggested, because it has to do with dating events in the cen-
turies prior
to the Exodus.
There are at least three possible
solutions to the problem of the
length of
of the sojourn
was only 215 years. A second solution is
the view of 400
years for
the sojourn. The third, and final,
solution to be discussed is
the idea
that 430 years elapsed between the entrance of Jacob and his
family into
The View That The Egyptian
Sojourn Was 215 Years
The most commonly held view of the length
of
in
logical
notations of Genesis 15:13,
This article
was presented as a paper at the Midwestern Section meet-
ing of the
Evangelical Theological Society on
Theological
Seminary.
And he said unto Abram, Know of a
surety that thy seed
shall be a stranger in a land that is
not theirs and shall
serve them; and they shall afflict
them four hundred -
years,
and Exodus
Now the sojourning of the children of
in
include
sojourns in both Canaan and
approximately
215 years were spent in Canaan and 215 years in
Among the proponents of this view are
Anstey,1 Meyer,2 Eadie,3
Alford4
and McDonald.5
Anstey is possibly its leading
adherent. He reckons the 430 years
of Exodus
12:40 from Abraham's call to the Exodus, and considers the
400 years of
Genesis 15:13 as embracing the same period, but beginning
with the
weaning of lsaac.6 According
to Anstey the Genesis passage has
to do with
the sojourning of Abraham's seed.
As he has explained:
Abraham's seed here means Abraham's
posterity, viz.,
Isaac from the time that he was weaned
and became
Abraham's heir (Gal.
ants.7
Holding to the idea that an oriental child
was weaned at age five,
the
conclusion is that the 400 years of Genesis 15 began when Isaac was
five years
old.8
Adding these five years plus the
twenty-five years that elapsed
between
Abraham's call and Isaac's birth to the 400 years of Exodus
Another argument is his interpretation of
the phrase "a land
that is not
theirs" in
Genesis 15:13. Since
possessed by
Abraham's seed before the conquest under Joshua, then
the 400
years must include both that land and Egypt.10 The interpre-
tation also
of McDonald is significant here as he sees the phrase as
being more
appropriately applied to
While no particular country is
specified, the appellation
"a land that is not theirs"
was, as regards Abraham
and his immediate posterity, more
applicable to
than it was to
20 GRACE JOURNAL
the time when it was taken possession
of by Joshua,
sense a strange (allotria Heb.
xi. 9, comp. ac. ii. c),
land, Abraham or his posterity having
no possession
in it beyond a place of sepulture, and
no fixed dwell-
ing place, whereas in
by royal grant.11
In connection with this Anstey does not
see the servitude and
affliction
mentioned in the verse as applying to the
skirts the
necessity of applying these to the entire four hundred years by
the use of
an introversion. In other words he
breaks down the passage
so that it
is constructed in the following manner:
Know of a surety that
A. thy seed shall be a
stranger in a land that is
not theirs,
B. and shall serve
them;
B. and they shall
afflict them;
A. four hundred years. 12
In this construction the two A clauses
correspond to each other
and relate
to the same event, that is, the whole period of the sojourn-
ing. The two B clauses likewise correspond and are
parenthetical and
relate to
the servitude in
A third argument used to establish the
extent of the sojourn is
the variant
readings to the Massoretic text of Exodus 12:40. The Sep-
tuagint and
the Samaritan Pentateuch both include
sojourn. The Septuagint version is as follows:
The sojourning of the children of
journed in
hundred and thirty years.
The Samaritan Pentateuch reads:
And the sojourn of the children of
fathers in the
The clause "and in the
the clause
"and of their fathers in the
Pentateuch
are not supported by any other manuscript evidence.
Anstey finds support in these variants
while not contradicting the
Massoretic
text. He believes that the Septuagint
and Samaritan insertions
. . . agree perfectly with the Hebrew
which is fur-
ther elucidated, but in no way
modified by them. They
correctly interpret the meaning of the
Hebrew text. . . .
But the meaning of the Hebrew is
sufficiently clear
without the explanatory addition when
the text is prop-
erly translated.13
To summarize at this point, the major
premise for the 215 year
view is the
interpretation of Genesis 15:13 and Exodus 12:40 as referring
harmoniously
to both the
for this is
the view that the seed of Abraham, beginning with Isaac, was
to dwell in
a land not their own, which included
time the
variant readings of Exodus 12:40 interpret that passage as
bringing the
two sojourns into one.
The final support for reckoning the 430
years from Abraham to
Sinai is the
implication of Galatians 3:17. This
verse, speaking of the
covenant of
the law which came many years after the Abrahamic prom-
ise, reads
as follows:
Now this I say: A covenant confirmed
beforehand by
God, the law, which came four hundred
and thirty years
after doth not disannul, so as to make
the promise of
none effect.
The implication of this verse is important
to the view under con-
sideration. Fergusson sees this verse as indicating the
space of 430
years to be
reckoned
. . . from the first solemn sanction
and confirmation
of the covenant by God to Abraham. . .
and the close
of it was at the giving of the law
upon
This supposed interpretation by Paul of
the 430 years is also
considered
by Meyer to be an evidence that Paul used the Septuagint at
this point,15
which in turn gives support to that version's interpretation
of Exodus
It is from the standpoint of the major
premise of 430 years for
the
is
calculated. The time from Abraham's call
to Jacob's entrance into
to Genesis
21:5 Isaac was born when Abraham was 100 years old or
twenty-five
years after Abraham entered
born when
Isaac was 60 years old (Gen. 25:26) and entered
130 (Gen.
47:9). The total of the figures of 25,
60 and 130 would be
22 GRACE JOURNAL
215, the
time span of the
430 would
leave a similar amount of time for
In order to demonstrate the validity of
215 years in
eral
arguments are put forth, the principal one being the genealogy of
Jochebed. According to Exodus 6:16-20 and Numbers
26:59, Jochebed
was the
daughter of Levi, who went into
who led the
children of
years, she
would have to be over 250 years old when Moses was born.
This
conclusion is reached by deducting the number of years Levi lived
in
from the 430
years. Ellicott summarizes the problem
as follows:
Amram, grandson of Levi, marries his
father's sister
Jochebed (Exod. 6:20; comp. Exod. 2:1;
Numb. 26:59).
Now as it appears probable by a
comparison of dates
that Levi was born when Jacob was
about 87, Levi would
have been 43 when he came into
94 years (Exod.
was born in the last year of Levi's
life, she must at
least have been 256 years old when
Moses was born,
if the sojourn in
Consequently, the 215 year view of the
Egyptian sojourn is con-
sidered more
reasonable as it does not demand such an inconceivable
age for
Jochebed. McDonald, making his
deductions from the 215 year
hypothesis,
suggests an approximate age of 45 for Jochebed at Moses'
birth.17
Anstey's Joseph to Moses connection is his
further demonstration
of a short
Egyptian sojourn. He subtracts the time
span from the call
of Abraham
to the death of Joseph, 286 years, and the age of Moses at
the Exodus,
80, from his 430 year figure of both sojourns and arrives
at a 64 year
interval between Joseph and Moses.18
This time period
would allow
for the events that took place between the two men (Exodus
1:1-22).
The proponents of this view see no
difficulty in harmonizing the
population
increase of
first of
all, sees confirmation of the 600,000 male population in the
later
notices in Numbers
an increase
is not beyond comprehension:
Mr. Malthus has shown that with an abundant supply
of food, a given population may continue to double its
numbers in about 15 years, and in favored cases, in
even less time. At this
rate of increase the 70 souls
who went down into
years to 2,293,760, which is perhaps about the number
of the entire population including Levites, women and
children; the 600,000 mentioned in Exodus 12 :37, Numb.
Others, such as Moller, have attributed
the phenomenal growth
simply to
Divine blessing.21
To summarize, the view of a 215 year
sojourn in
of all based
upon the idea that the period from the call of Abraham to
the Exodus
was 430 years. This idea is derived from
the interpreta-
tion and
harmonization of Genesis
land not
their own from the weaning of Isaac.
This interpretation is
further
supported by adopting the Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch
readings of
Exodus
430 year
span.
Within this framework of time, the time of
the sojourning in
year period
leaving 215 years for
demonstrated
by the genealogy of Jochebed and the short span of years
between
Joseph and Moses. At the same time, the
increase in the He-
brew
population in
There are, however, several objections to
this interpretation.
To begin,
while the Genesis
the 400 year
sojourning is to be the experience of Abraham's seed,
yet the
verse does not specify the reckoning of this period to begin
with Isaac.
A second objection is to the
interpretation of the phrase "a land
not their
own" in the same passage. While it
is true that the Israelites
did not take
possession of the
land was
still theirs. The very context of the
passage is concerned with
deeding the
land to Abraham and his posterity. The
land not their own
was in
direct contrast to the
marked:
It is also difficult to suppose that in Gen. XV. 13 the
'land not theirs,' in which
and which seems to be contrasted with the land promised
to Abraham, includes both
so different in their relation to Israel.22
24 GRACE JOURNAL
Thirdly the passage refers to servitude
and affliction during the
period of
the 400 years. The children of Abraham
did not serve others
in
Anstey's
introversion of Genesis 12:13 is really a circumnavigation of
the real
sense of the verse.24
Keil and Delitzsch have suggested the
importance of the passage
as follows:
By this revelation Abram had the future history of his
seed pointed out to him in general outlines, and was
informed at the same time why neither he nor his de-
scendants could obtain immediate possession of the prom-
ised land, viz., because the Canaanites were not yet
ripe for the sentence of extermination.25
The fourth objection is to the
interpretation of Exodus 12:40 as
based upon
the variant readings. In refutation of
this supporting evi-
dence it may
be said the more reliable text is the Massoretic text.26
The
implication of the Hebrew text is that the residence in
cupied the
whole 430 year period. It would certainly
be more natural
in reckoning
the time of the departure from
sojourn
there than the period elapsed since Abraham entered Canaan.27
While the
context of the Galatians passage would seem to support
the idea of
430 years elapsing between Abraham's call and the law, a
possible
solution is that Paul may be looking at periods or ages. This
will be
discussed later.
The objection, the fifth, here is that
support could be rendered
to the 215
year view if it could be determined that Paul used the Sep-
tuagint. In discussing this point, Ridderbos concludes
that it is im-
possible to
determine Paul's chronological source:
The LXX transmits Ex.
time in which
to 430 years. There is,
however, no equivalent for
the words kai en gei chanaan in the Hebrew text. It
is therefore impossible for us to determine whether and
in what sense Paul takes his figure from one or another
of these data.28
Such being the case, the final
interpretation of Galatians 3:17
can not be
based on the Septuagint. This relieves
one from the neces-
sity of
supporting a 215 year Egyptian sojourn at this point, or from
facing the
definite problem of Paul's use of an inaccurate source.
A sixth objection is the insistence on a
strict genealogical re-
cord of
Exodus 6:16-20. This is admittedly a
difficult problem. Keil
and
Delitzsch argue that the genealogical records are very often in-
complete due
to missing links. Their argument is as
follows:
The genealogies do not always contain a complete enu-
meration of all the separate links, but very frequently
intermediate links of little importance are omitted.29
Keil and Delitzsch then demonstrate this
by a comparison of Exo-
dus 6:16-20
with the other genealogies in which more than four genera-
tions
between Levi and Moses must have occurred.30 Numbers 26:29ff,
27:1, and
Joshua 17:3 show six generations from Joseph to Zelophehad.
Ruth
Nahshon who
was a tribal prince in the time of Moses.
I Chronicles
cant is
possibly I Chronicles 7:20 which lists nine or ten generations
from Joseph
to Joshua. Keil and Delitzsch
significantly have commented:
This last genealogy shows most clearly the impossi-
bility of the view founded upon the Alexandrian version
that the sojourn of the Israelites in
215 years; for ten generations, reckoned at 40 years
each, harmonize veil well with 430 years, but cer-
tainly not with 215.31
Archer sees the same problem, although
from a slightly dif-
ferent
reckoning. His conclusion is that
. . . ten generations can hardly be reconciled with a
mere 215 years (especially considering the longer life
span of pre-Exodus Israelites), but it fits in very plau-
sibly with an interval of 430 years.32
The genealogy of Jochebed, then, does not
support a short so-
journ of 215
years in
genealogy
itself.
Added to this is Thiele's statement:
That some considerable period was involved is clear
from the fact that Joseph before his death saw the chil-
dren of the third generation of both his sons (Gen.
50:23), and that at the time of Exodus Amram and his
brothers were already regarded as founders of clans
(Num.
26 GRACE JOURNAL
The increase from 70 to approximately one
million Hebrews
does in
reality militate against the 215 year view.
This is the final
objection to
the idea. It is certainly admitted that
such an increase is
Divinely
possible in 215 years. In fact, even in
the 430 year view the
Divine
blessing of Exodus 1:20 should be cited.
Yet, the tremendous
increase of
the nation seems more plausible during a 430 year period.
The problem
of increase is more paramount with only 215 years of so-
journing. Archer views the problem as follows:
If there were indeed only four generations, then the
rate of multiplication would necessarily have been as-
tronomic. Even if seven
generations should be crammed
into the 215 years, there would have had to be an aver-
age of four surviving sons per father.34
In conclusion, from a study of the lines
of evidence, an Egyp-
tian bondage
of 215 years was highly improbable and unlikely.
The View That The Egyptian
Sojourn Was 400 Years
Rea35 and Hoehner36
favor the position of a 400 year Egyptian
bondage.
Rea proceeds to establish this idea by
first of all accepting the
Septuagint
and Samaritan Pentateuch readings of Exodus 12:40. The 430
years of
that verse would thus apply to both
ever, Rea
reckons the beginning of this period not from Abraham's call,
but from
Jacob's return from
name was
confirmed as
emphasis
upon the phrase "the children of
Exodus 12
verse. To quote Rea:
The verse therefore states the length of time which
elapsed from the return of Jacob from
with his children, unto the departure of the Israelites
from
family from Padan-aram is compared with the exodus
of Moses accompanied by the nation of
odus 12:40, the 430 years cannot cover the entire pa-
triarchal age and the sojourn in
Abraham's arrival in
verse distinctly says "the time that the children of
ham and Isaac.38
Galatians 3:17 is viewed as giving support
to this in stating that
the 430 year
period began with the confirmation, not the institution, of
the
Abrahamic covenant. The last
confirmation was made with Jacob in
Canaan years
before the entrance into
The next step is to subtract the
intervening time between Jacob's
return to
Canaan and his entrance into
leaves
approximately 400 years for the Egyptian sojourn and produces a
harmony of
Exodus 12:40 with Genesis 15:13 and Acts 13:19. 20. Com-
menting on
Acts 13:19, 20 Rea makes his conclusion as follows:
According to the Apostle Paul, then, the time that the
Israelites spent in
instead of 430 years. The
slightly shorter period ac-
cords with the four hundred years of Gen. 15:13 and
almost exactly with the 430 years of Ex.
itan Pentateuch and Septuagint Versions), thirty-four of
which were spent in
descended into
Rea believes that the Acts
strong
support for his view. In dealing with
the textual problem con-
nected with
this passage, he has chosen the text of the Alexandrian
family, the
Latin Vulgate and the Armenian Version and made the follow-
ing
translation of the latter half of verse twenty:
He gave them their land for an inheritance--about four
hundred and fifty years. And after these things He
gave them judges until Samuel the prophet.41
This would mean 400 years for the Egyptian
bondage. 40 years
for the
wilderness journey. and 7 years for the conquest of the land
under
Joshua's leadership, making a total of 447 years or "about 450
years"
as the text states.
This is of course the alternative to the
King James Version.
based on the
Byzantine texts, which places the four hundred and fifty
years after
the phrase "he gave unto them judges." This positioning
of the
figure would tend to indicate that it was meant to apply to the
period of
the judges instead of the Egyptian sojourn.42
The first objection to this view is the use of the Septuagint and
Samaritan
renderings of Exodus 12:40. As already noted the Massoretic
text is the
more reliable text and its rendering of the passage does not
include
Canaan with
journ in the
reference does seem to be contrary to the point of the
28 GRACE JOURNAL
reference
which was to give the years spent in
their
termination.
To make the sojourning run from the return
of Jacob to
to the
Exodus on the basis of the use of the appellation "the children
of
A third objection is the restriction of
the beginning of the 430
year period
of Galatians 3 to the confirmation of the covenant in Genesis
35 when
Jacob returned to
nant to
Jacob could very well be seen in Genesis 46 when he entered
to make a
great nation of him while in that land.
The promise of a
great
posterity had its roots in the covenant and consequently its re-
iteration
was another confirmation of its provisions.
The 430 years
would
subsequently run from Jacob's entrance into
under Moses'
leadership.
In conclusion, this view does not seem to
explain adequately the
Biblical data.
The View That The Egyptian
Sojourn Was 430 Years
This second most prevalent view simply
states the length of
Jacob's
entrance into
Some of the proponents of this view are
Keil and Delitzsch,
Archer,44
Leupold, Toussaint,46 Lenski, 47 Jamieson, Fausset and
Kitchen.49
Basically, this view takes Genesis
15:13-16; Exodus
Acts 7:6 in
their normal sense. The Genesis 15
passage refers to the
sojourn in a
land not theirs when God has just deeded
Abraham and
his seed (cf. 15:7, 18). Along with this
it is also noted
that
Abraham's children did not serve others in
they
afflicted by their neighbors in Canaan.50
The 400 years of the passage is to be
considered as a rounded
number used
in prophetic style51 with the fourth generation reference of
verse 16
denoting the same period of time. Archer
has significantly
commented:
It is evident that in Abraham's case a generation
was computed at one hundred years, and this was
appropriate enough in view of the fact that Abraham
was precisely one hundred when he became the father
of Isaac. At least four centuries, then, and not a
mere 215 years, would mark the Israelite sojourn in
the foreign land.52
An objection has been raised to the view
under discussion be-
cause of the
idea of a rounded number being used. The
thought is that
such an
interpretation could allow too much liberty in the interpretation
of other
numbers in the Bible and consequently do damage to the doc-
trine of
inspiration.53 However, if it
can be shown that the Bible does
use rounded
numbers then the doctrine of inspiration is in no way af-
fected.54 Paul, for example, in Acts 13 suggested such
a use when he
used the
phrase "about the space of" in summarizing the years of the
Egyptian
bondage, the wilderness wanderings and the conquest of
The author
of II Samuel rounds off the years of David's reign at 40 and
then
explains that the reign was actually composed of 7 years and 6
months at
meration of
Job's possessions must have involved the use of rounded
numbers for
it would have been trivial for the author to have given an
odd ten or
fifty or hundred in /figures running into thousands.55
The Bible then, does contain rounded
numbers. The real issue
is
determining, mainly by context, the use of such figures in anyone
text.
The normal literal sense of Exodus 12:40,
with the Massoretic
text being
preferred, is a 430 year Egyptian sojourn for
The Acts 7:6 passage is evidently a quote
of Genesis 15:13. It
reads as
follows:
And
God spake on this wise, that his seed should sojourn
in a strange land, and that they should bring them into
bondage and treat them ill, four hundred years.
Chadwick sees Peter quoting
. . . plainly and confidently the prediction that the seed
of Abraham should be four hundred years in bondage and
that one nation should entreat them evil four hundred
years. . . .56
A second argument for this view is the
support of Acts 13:19, 20.
Following
the A. S. V., which is based on B, Aleph, A, and C, the
four best
texts according to Westcott and Hort,57 the four hundred and
30 GRACE JOURNAL
fifty years,
which preceded the period of the judges, would include the
rounded
number of 400 for the Egyptian sojourn.
Lenski has arranged
the
chronology of the passage as follows:
The round number "about 450 years" covers the time
for the sojourn in
According to Acts 7:6 (Gen. 15:13) 400 years were spent
in
the desert to
conquering the land which is certainly close to 450
years.58
A third argument is the genealogical
tables in I Chronicles 7:20-27,
indicating
nine or ten generations between Joseph and Joshua. As already
suggested
ten generations can hardly be reconciled with a mere 215 years.
From this a fourth argument is
derived. The increase of the
Hebrew
population from 70 to approximately one million is more plaus-
ible with
nine or ten generations in 430 years than with three or four
generations
in 215 years. Such an increase in 215
years is very dif-
ficult to
comprehend, although it is divinely possible, of course.
Archer has demonstrated the plausibility
of the increase in 430
years in the
following quotation:
If the sojourn lasted 430 years, then the desired mul-
tiplication would result from an average of three sons
and three daughters to every married couple during the
first six generations, and an average of two sons and
two daughters in the last four generations. At this
rate, by the tenth generation there would be (accord-
ing to Delitzsch, Pentateuch,
II, 30) 478,224 sons above
twenty by the four hundreth year of the sojourn, while
125,326 males of military age would still be left over
from the ninth generation. These together, then, would
total 603,550 men at arms.59
The problem in connection with this
genealogical consideration is
the
genealogical line in Exodus 6:16-20.
This is admittedly a difficult
problem. The solution may very well be that there were
two men by
the name of
Amram in this line.60 Amram,
the son of Kohath, was
probably an
earlier ancestor of Amram, the father of Moses.
In fact, a simple comparison of this
genealogy with Numbers
3:27, 28
will show the impossibility of assuming that the father of Moses
in verse 20
was the son of Kohath mentioned in verse 18.
According
to Numbers
the four
branches, Amramites, Isharites, Hebronites, and Uzzielites,
who
consisted together of 8,600 men and boys.
If divided equally a
fourth, or
2,150 men, would belong to the Amramites.
According to
Exodus 18:3,
4, Moses himself had only two sons.
Consequently, if
Amram the
son of Kohath, and tribal father of the Amramites, was the
same person
as Amram the father of Moses, Moses must have had
2,147
brothers and brothers' sons. But this would be absolutely im-
possible and
it must be granted that an indefinitely long list of genera-
tions has
been omitted between the former and latter descendant of the
same name.61
Kitchen argues that Exodus 6:16-20 gives
the tribe (Levi), clan
(Kohath) and
family-group (Amram by Jochebed) to which Moses and
Aaron belong
and not their actual parents.62
In connection with this 430 year view,
there is the problem of
Paul's
statement in Galatians 3:17 which seems to indicate the time
from Abraham
to Sinai was 430 years.
Some possible solutions have been
suggested. Lenski's sugges-
tion is that
the time is an understatement on the part of Paul. His pur-
pose was to
convince his opponents the number could have been larger
by
understating it.63 This is,
however, a very weak argument and
does not fit
the exactness that characterizes the Apostle in his writings
(cf.
A second solution has been given by
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown.
The
assertion of this view is that the 430 years are to be reckoned from
Jacob to the
giving of the law.64 The
objection to this view is that the
context of
Galatians 3 concerns Abraham and not Jacob.
A more satisfactory solution is the one
offered by Toussaint
which is as
follows:
Paul here is considering periods of time. The promises
were given during the lives of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob. This period of time preceded the giving of the
Mosaic law at Sinai by 430 years, the length of the
sojourn in Egypt.65
As previously discussed, the last recorded
confirmation is given
in Genesis
46 when Jacob went down into
corded
confirmation to the Exodus 430 years elapsed.
In conclusion, the 430 year view is based
upon a normal inter-
pretation of
Exodus 12:40 which indicates a 430 year Egyptian sojourn
32 GRACE JOURNAL
for
ing rounded
numbers. This is true also of Acts
13:19, 20 which sum-
marizes the
"about" 450 years before the judges.
Further confirmation of this view is the
genealogical table of
I Chronicles
7:20-27 which indicates at least nine or ten generations be-
tween Joseph
and Joshua, making the increase from 70 to approximately
one million
more plausible. The problem of Amram in
Exodus 6:16-20
can be
answered by the argument of there being two men in that line by
that name.
The interpretation of Galatians 3:17 is
answered by the sugges-
tion Paul is
referring to periods or ages, i. e., 430 years elapsed be-
tween the
period of the confirmation of the Abrahamic covenant and the
beginning of
the period of the law.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study has been to
consider three solutions
to the
problem of the length of
of 215 years
and 400 years are rejected as inadequate basically be-
cause of
their interpretation of Exodus 12:40, i. e., their acceptance
of the
Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch readings of the verse in
contra-distinction
to the Massoretic text.
The view of 430 years is set forth as the
true solution to the
problem,
being based upon the better text, the Massoretic, and pro-
perly
interpreting the pertinent scripture references in their normal
sense.
DOCUMENTATI0N
1. Martin Anstey, The Romance of Bible
Chronology (
Marshall Brothers, 1913), p. 114.
2. H. A. W. Meyer, The Epistle to the
Galatians (
and T. Clark, 1873), p. 167.
3. John Eadie, A Commentary on the Greek Text
of the Epistle of
Paul to the Galatians (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1869), p. 260.
4. Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (
1958),
III. IV., 31.
5. Donald McDonald, "Chronology", The
Imperial Bible Dictionary.
Ed. Patrick Fairbairn (London: Blackie and Son, 1887), p. 31.
6. Anstey, p. 117.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid., p. 114.
9. Ibid., p. 117.
10. Ibid.
11. McDonald, p. 31.
12. Anstey, p. 127.
13. Ibid., p. 129.
14. James Fergusson, An Exposition of the
Epistles of Paul, (Evans-
ville,
15. Meyer, p. 167; see also Alford, p. 31.
16. Charles
J. Ellicott,
Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, and Green, 1863), p. 61.
See also Alford, p. 31.
17. McDonald, p. 31.
18. Anstey, p. 124.
19. Anstey, p. 123.
20. Ibid.
21. Wilhelm Moller, "The Book of
Exodus", The International
Stand-
ard Bible Encyclopaedia (
Publishing Company, 1957), II, 1965-66.
22. Joseph Agar Beet, Commentary on
Galatians
(London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1903), p. 89.
23.
24. Ibid.
25. C. F.
Keil and F. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old
Testament (
pany, 1959), I, 216.
26. Merrill F. Unger, Introductory Guide to
the Old Testament.
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1951), pp. 144 and
156ff; F. F. Bruce, The Books and the Parchments (Westwood,
lical Studies (Part I), Bibliotheca Sacra, CXII (October-Decem-
ber, 1955), p. 351.
27. Beet, p. 89.
28. Herman Ridderbos, The Epistle of Paul to
the Churches of
latia (
1953), p. 136.
29. Keil and Delitzsch, II, 30.
30. Ibid.
31. Ibid.
34 GRACE JOURNAL
32. Gleason L. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction
(Chicago: Moody Press, 1964), p. 212.
33. Edwin R. Thiele, "Chronology, Old
Testament," The Zonder-
van
Pictorial Bible Dictionary, ed.
Merrill C. Tenney (Grand
Rapids; Zondervan Publishing Company, 1963), p. 167. Thiele
argues that it is impossible to give a categorical answer as to
all that is involved in the 430 year sojourn, but then goes on to
imply that on the bases of Galatians 3:16, 17 the sojourn must
have included both Canaan and
34. Archer, p. 212.
35. John Rea, "The Historical Setting of the
Exodus and the Conquest"
(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Grace Theological Seminary,
1958), pp. 80ff.
36. Harold W. Hoehner, "The Duration of the
Egyptian Bondage,"
Bibliotheca Sacra, CXXVI (October-December, 1969), pp. 313 -16.
37. Rea, p. 80. Hoehner does not place much stock
in either the
Septuagint or Samaritan Pentateuch for chronological notices, but
does comment that the inclusion of "in the
both texts "may point back to some early tradition in the
text.
It is somewhat difficult to explain its inclusion except that
there
was some sort of early tradition for this reading," pp.
315-16.
38. Rea, p. 80.
39. Hoehner, pp. 313-14.
40. Rea, p. 81. He actually holds that the
Egyptian sojourn was 396
years due to the 34 years mentioned above. The number 400 is
an approximate number. Hoehner would see the 400 years as
exact due to the doctrine of inspiration, p. 313.
41. Ibid.
42. Ibid.
43. Keil and Delitzsch, I, p. 216.
44. Archer, p. 211.
45. H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Genesis (
burg Press, 1942), p. 486.
46. Toussaint, P.. 72.
47. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles
(Columbus, Ohio: The Wartburg Press, 1944), p. 520.
48. Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David
Brown, Commentary
on the Old and New
Testaments (
lishing House, 1934), p. 330.
49. K. A. Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old
Testament (
Inter-Varsity Press, 1966), pp. 52-53.
50. Ibid., See also Rea, p. 136.
51. Keil and Delitzsch, I, 216.
52. Archer, p. 211; See also Leupold, p. 486.
53. Hoehner,
p. 313.
54. See the
following for listing and discussions of rounded numbers
in the Bible: John J.
Davis, Biblical Numerology (Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1968), pp. 51-54; William T.Smith,
"Number, " The International Standard Bible
Encyclopedia, ed.
James Orr (
pany, 1957), IV, 2158-69.
55. J. Sidlow Baxter, Explore The Book (
and Scott, 1952), III, 29-30.
56. B. A. Chadwick, "The Book of
Exodus," The Expositor's Bible.
Ed.
W. Robertson Nicoll (
1903), pp. 197. 98.
57. Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony
Hort, The New
Testament in the
Original Greek (
Company, 1948, p. 567.
58. Lenski, p. 520.
59. Archer, p. 212.
60. Toussaint, p. 72.
61. Keil and De1itzsch, I, 470.
62. Kitchen, p. 54.
63. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of
the Galatians, to the Ephesians and to the Philippians (Columbus,
64. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, p. 330.
65. Toussaint, p. 71.
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
Grace
Theological Seminary
www.grace.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at: