9

In Genesis 15:13 God told Abram that his descendants would be slaves in a foreign land for 400 years. This number is also mentioned in Acts 7:6.

Exodus 12:41 says that the Israelites were in Egypt for 430 years. This number also appears in Galatians 3:17.

But when you add up the genealogical record [which?] you only come up with about 190-215 years.

How can we resolve this seeming contradiction?

Schuh
  • 2,611
  • 15
  • 25
Randy
  • 99
  • 1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 5
    I edited your question to clarify it a little. Can you please add in the specific details for which genealogical records add up to 190-215 years? – curiousdannii Oct 10 '13 at 07:29
  • The answer is 300 years. Here is a video that explains it perfectly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNeskKUTUnw –  Nov 08 '13 at 04:14
  • The video posted above seems, for some mysterious reason, to think that the 450 years mentioned in Acts 13:20 refer to the time spent in Egypt. – Lucian Oct 03 '17 at 03:05
  • Much of Biblical chronology seems made up of chunks of 430-440 years: From Abraham's entrance into Canaan to Israel's Exodus out of Egypt, from the Exodus until the building of the Temple (LXX), from the Temple's construction to its destruction, and then we have Daniel's 62 weeks-of-years, spanning from its demolition to the Maccabean uprising. If people would count in dozens, then 432 years would amount to a quarter of a millennium. – Lucian Jan 24 '18 at 08:07
  • Is it wrong to think that the 30 years of the 430 years consisted of the entirety of Joseph's childhood up to when he had to stand before Pharaoh? God said that He predestined Joseph to be who we see in the Bible so that God could show the world that a man like Joseph could save an entire nation (of course Joseph's role could be taken up by any other son of Israel since there's multiple paths that they could choose to embark, which God all ordained from eternity). – AngelusVastator Dec 04 '19 at 02:38

6 Answers6

8

At the outset let me state that I am Jewish, not Christian. That being said, Gal 3:16-17 is line with the Oral Tradition (that Orthodox Jews believe provides authoritative interpretation of the Old Testament). Abraham is told that his children will sojourn in "a land that is is not their own" for 400 years (Genesis 15:13). Egypt is not specified and neither is it clear that the suffering and enslavement would last the full 400 years (in the cantorial notes there is full stop, which functions like a semi-colon) before the words "400 years"). The Jewish tradition understands the 400 years to begin with the birth of Isaac who was always a sojourner, moving from place to place and never governing land.

The reason why it is unlikely that the enslavement was actually 400 years is because it would mean that Yocheved (Jochabad), the mother of Moses, lived an extraordinarily long time, well beyond the norm of her time period, without any mention of a miracle. Moses was 80 years old at the time of the Exodus (Exodus 7:7). Moses' mother, Yocheved, was the daughter of Levi (Exodus 6:16-20). Levi died at the age 137 (Exodus 6:16). Joseph was 39 when his brothers came to Egypt (30 + 7 + 2). While we don't know exactly how much older Levi was than Joseph, we can conservatively estimate (i.e. the lowest possible) at 6 years. Therefore Levi was at least 45 when he came to Egypt. Even if Yocheved was born in the very last year of Levi's life (92 years later) she would have been 228 (400 - 80 - 92) when Moses was born!

conceptualinertia
  • 1,191
  • 1
  • 11
  • 17
  • 1
    Do these calculations only apply if we assume the line from Levi to Moses is complete? – joshuahedlund Aug 27 '15 at 21:51
  • Yes. Do you have any reason to believe it isn't? – conceptualinertia Dec 09 '15 at 21:24
  • 1
    Some reasons I've seen given to doubt the line being complete are that 1) generally, many Biblical lines are incomplete, 2) specifically, the equivalent line to Joshua has 10 generations, 3) Levi's numbers of descendants per son in Moses' day are unrealistic if only a couple generations later – joshuahedlund Dec 10 '15 at 21:16
6

Short Answer: The Israelites were enslaved in Egypt for 400 years. There is nothing in the chronologies that indicates anything different.


Here's the chronology as provided in the Hebrew Scriptures:

The easy calculations:

  • When Abe was 100 he had Isaac
  • When Isaac was 60 he had Jacob
  • When Jacob (Israel) was 130 he and his sons went to Egypt

    • NOTE: Jacob was not enslaved in Egypt! He enjoyed favor all the days of his life in Egypt.
  • After some time the Egyptians became jealous and fearful and enslaved the Israelites as prophesied

  • The Israelites were enslaved in Egypt for 400 years

The back-calculations:

  • The sons of Israel were in Egypt for 430 years, which means they were in Egypt 30 years before they were enslaved (that clarifies the unknown from the previous note above)

  • When Jacob and his sons entered Egypt, they were in the 2nd year of famine

  • The years of famine were immediately preceded by 7 years of plenty

  • Joseph stood before Pharoah and interpreted his dream about the impending plenty/famine when he was 30 years old

  • That makes Jacob about 91 years old when he had Joseph, and Joseph about 69 years old when the Israelites were enslaved. He lived another 41 years after that, dying at around 110 years old

Conclusion: There is nothing in the Biblical chronology that indicates they were only in bondage in Egypt for 215 years.

Jas 3.1
  • 12,125
  • 7
  • 76
  • 131
  • 4
    Thanks for your comment! Your answer is simple, neat, and easy to understand. But a couple of questions arise: 1) Why does Paul in Gal 3:16-17 say that 430 years passed between Abraham's promise and the giving of the law on Sinai? 2) Why does Ex 1:6-10 indicate that Israel began to be enslaved after Joseph was dead? 3) Why does Gen 15:16 say that Israel would return to the promised land four generations after leaving - whereas you say Israel was outside the promised land 430+40 = 470 years (certainly more than four generations)? Looking forward to your response! – Niobius Nov 08 '13 at 21:30
  • @Niobius Great questions. (1) First, I'm not sure Paul's authorial intent was to clarify the chronology of the Israelites' time in Egypt so much as to highlight the extremely large temporal separation in events. Second, even if he did mean to establish an exact chronology, by my reading the time would start with the *ratification* of the covenant, so we would need to determine what that refers to. (2) In studying the literary structure of Ex 1, it appears vv.1-7 are introductory, and not necessarily chronologically prior to v.8, similar to Gen. 1-2, etc. (cont...) – Jas 3.1 Nov 08 '13 at 22:37
  • @Niobius (...cont) (3) It is feasible that this span was four generations. See Exodus 6:14-20. Levi --> Kohath --> Amram --> Moses. The problem only arises when we artificially define a generation as "x number of years." – Jas 3.1 Nov 08 '13 at 22:40
  • 1
    Thanks for the answers! But 1) Though the authorial intent of Gal 3:16-17 is certainly not to give an accurate chronology, we cannot simply dismiss the number 430 as irrelevant to the chronology - the number must have come from somewhere. Moreover, it says, "Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made ... the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later". Paul seems to be talking about when the promises were made not ratified. (cont...) – Niobius Nov 09 '13 at 13:55
  • 1
    (...cont) 2) It says in Exodus that a new Pharaoh arose who did not know Joseph - it would be difficult not to know one of the most powerful men in the country (if he was alive). It also says that Israel was more numerous and powerful than the Egyptians - a great feat if we are talking about the 70+3 people of Israel after only 30 years in Egypt. 3) If Sarah were way too old to have children (unmiraculously) at 90 and Abraham was considered too old at 100 (Rom 4:19), it seems odd that for 4 generations, the average age of childbirth would be ca. 100. Odd, but admittedly not impossible. – Niobius Nov 09 '13 at 14:05
  • @Niobius (1) To clarify, I think he got the number 430 from the OT. (In fact, that's my point; he got it from the OT, not from an unknown extrabiblical source or Sensus Plenior.) Regarding the starting point, in my NASB Bible the 430 year statement is in the same sentence as the ratification but a different sentence than the giving of the promise. (2) It would seem the authorial intent in Ex. 1:8 is to paint a contrast between the favor he enjoyed under the old Pharaoh and the coming persecution from the new Pharaoh. It probably doesn't mean "he had never heard of him," right? (cont...) – Jas 3.1 Nov 09 '13 at 17:49
  • @Niobius (...cont) You make an interesting point regarding the population... I'll have to think about that one a bit more. (3) Regarding Abraham and Sarah being "too old," check out this answer when you get a chance and let me know what you think – Jas 3.1 Nov 09 '13 at 17:49
  • You're right - it's possible to interpret the 430 years to be between the ratification and the giving of the law. But wouldn't Paul be more likely to use OT references which could be looked up and understood from the OT? If we can't know when the covenant was ratified, how could Paul have gotten the number from the OT? 2) I agree - there's a difference between "did not know" and "never heard of". But it does seem like Ex 1:8-9 ("they are more and mightier than us") follows Ex 1-7 ("they multiplied and grew exceedingly mighty") chronologically. (cont...)
  • – Niobius Nov 10 '13 at 07:22
  • (...cont) 3) The answer you referred to is awesome! - you're right, the "too old" argument doesn't hold water. – Niobius Nov 10 '13 at 07:22
  • This doesn't address the genealogical record part of the question. Specifically, Exodus Chapter 6 gives the lifespans of Kehath and Amram as 133 and 137 respectively, and in Chapter 8 Moses's age when confronting Pharaoh is given as 80. A literal reading of the text has Kehath as Amram's father and Amram as Moses's father, and we know from the end of Genesis that Kehath was one of the seventy people who came to Egypt; there are thus not enough years of Kehath + Amram + Moses to reach 430 years in Egypt. – Alex Jan 21 '19 at 07:14
  • @Alex They could be ancestors. – AngelusVastator Dec 03 '19 at 12:17
  • @AngelusVastator They could be. But that would be an argument that should be made in the answer. – Alex Dec 04 '19 at 12:16
  • @Jas3.1 You stated: "...Joseph about 69 years old when the Israelites were enslaved...." Where in the Bible it says Israel was already enslaved during the lifetime of Joseph? Everything seems to suggest otherwise, that slavery started after his death. Please, correct me if I am misunderstanding you. – TruthSeeker Sep 23 '23 at 02:25