Babel in Romans 1

Posted on:

Modified on:



Here I am, over four months since my last post, and I’m way overdue on publishing a next post. There are several reasons for my tardiness—a 79th birthday and the minor health issues that go with that; income taxes to submit; spring yard work to complete; but most of all, as usual, mission creep! It’s now time to cull some of the bloat that has crept into this post, including sections on Melchizedek, Isaac and Jacob, the prophets, Revelation, and several more interesting but unnecessary subtopics. Each of those may become one or more new article stubs.

In that last post, After the Flood: Globalism and World Conflict, I presented the Biblical record in Genesis 11 of the Tower of Babel, and its result in the proliferation of languages, the Dispersion of mankind, and the assignment of lesser “gods” (angelic “princes”) to shepherd all but the not-yet-formed Nation of Israel.

My intention for this post is to elaborate on Babel, and then to show how Paul referred to Babel’s effect on humanity when he wrote Romans 1.

My goal in a blog post is seldom to be brief and simple, because in-depth Biblical understanding is never simplistic. I don’t write for an academic audience, but I do target serious, thinking Christians who want to go beyond homiletic rhetoric, Sunday School platitudes and medieval Church tradition.

Babel

Babel, as I explained last time, was probably the city we now know as Eridu, not the distant city of Babylon as most people, including many archaeologists and other scholars, assume. Therefore, though the Tower of Babel was probably a ziggurat, it was not the Etemenanki Ziggurat found at Babylon.

I have come to believe that Genesis 11 is one of the most pivotal passages in the Bible, because it introduces three elements that define pretty much all of human history:

  1. The genealogy of Abraham, the father of Godly notables including Joseph, Moses, David, and Jesus.
  2. Babel, the point of origin of all subsequent political systems on earth, dominated by false gods and, today, mostly godless human leaders.
  3. Nimrod, the first of many empire builders, a group which will culminate in Antichrist.

The gods

In Genesis 11, the Tower of Babel story records the point of time at which Almighty God declared to His Divine Council,

The monologue above is fictional, but the result is not. The first paragraph above paraphrases what the Bible records from Genesis 3 to the end of Revelation!

Most of you are familiar with the Tower of Babel story and will immediately recognize that event in the second paragraph.

Paragraph 3 will be new to most of you, though I’ve written about it before. In this post, I’ll examine that part of the story a bit more exegetically and demonstrate its importance to all of human history.

God/gods defined

There are many verses in both the Old Testament and the New which state that there is only one God!

Well, yes, that is certainly true, but language is a funny thing… what does the English word, “god”, mean? I’ve used Merriam Webster my whole life, and here is what that dictionary says:

Breaking that down by the numbers:

1. I think that’s an excellent definition of the God I worship! There is only one God, with a capital “G”; that is, Elohim, with a capital “E.” Yahweh is the only preexistent being, the Creator of all else that exists.

2. But that one and only Elohim, Yahweh, created a host of lesser immortal spirit beings, the elohim with a lower case “e”. Some of these, so-called “fallen angels, evidently began claiming to be “gods” very early in prehistory. Others were angelic beings that He placed in authority over the nations He established at Babel. These either were already corrupt or became corrupt by association with corrupt humans, demanded worship, and thus fulfill the second definition from the dictionary listing above.

3. We’ve all heard the homiletic theme that anything one allows to come between himself or herself and God in reality become that person’s idol; i.e., his god. Definition 3. Well, there is obviously some truth in this, but I don’t like the concept. I think it trivializes the reality and danger of the definition 2 gods!

4. This definition acknowledges the ancient practice of some kings and emperors of claiming deity for themselves.

My philosophical journey

As a child in Sunday School and children’s church, I was bothered by the idea of Egyptian magicians being able to duplicate some of Moses’ demonstrations to Pharaoh of his legitimacy as God’s representative. It soon dawned on me that since Moses’ power came from God, surely the magicians’ power came from Satan. Then when I learned about “fallen angels”, it seemed an obvious jump to conclude that maybe the Egyptian gods, and by extension the gods of the other regions, were “those guys.”

Eventually, I read in Daniel about “the prince of Persia” and in Paul’s letters about “principalities and powers.” So, for most of my life I’ve believed that behind every pagan stone idol there was a real god—small “g”, definition 2.

Unpacking Scripture

More recently, I learned that each “nation” (however God, Himself defines that term) is overseen by an angelic prince, and that as a group they are under judgement by God.

Judging the judges

0 A Psalm of Asaph.

1 God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:

2 “How long will you judge unjustly
and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
3 Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.
4 Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”

5 They have neither knowledge nor understanding,
they walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

6 I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you
;
7 nevertheless, like men you shall die,
and fall like any prince.

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth;
for you shall inherit all the nations!

— Psalm 82:0-8 (ESV)

From verses 1–5 alone you would conclude that God has convened His Divine Council to prosecute wicked human judges, but verses 6 and 7 of this song identifies them as immortal princes, who God can nevertheless destroy just as He can their mortal counterparts. Once that happens, God will reclaim the principalities they rule.

The origin of the princes

The question is, how did all that come about? How did the lesser gods get their principalities in the first place? The answer to that is found in Deuteronomy 32:

Using another translation:

And, from the familiar King James:

For the most part, these English translations of this passage are fairly compatible. Of these three, I favor the ESV and KJV in the top half of verse 8, because they seem to me to follow the original Hebrew better. For example, the Septuagint (LXX) has God

/ Dividing the nations / and / separating the sons (descendants) of Adam /

— which seems to be a redundancy, while ESV says of God

/ (when He) divided the inheritance / and / (when He) divided mankind (again the descendants of Adam) /

— so, two separate things are divided, which I think is truer to the Hebrew.

In Hebrew, words and the letters comprising them are both read right to left; in general, the sentence syntax is ordered verb-subject-object; and elements like prepositions, case, tense and number are tacked onto the verb as either a prefix or a suffix.

In the following interlinear diagram of verse 8, the same passage could be read,

/ The Most-High (God) / when He divided their inheritance to / the nations /
/ When He separated / the sons / of Adam /.

Deuteronomy 32:8 interlinear, with Hebrew from the Masoretic text. ©biblehub.com

All three of these renditions of verse 8ab can best be explained as a description of what God did at Babel. God separated the nations and presumably gave each of them an inheritance—which is not mentioned in Genesis 11. But a territorial inheritance is implied in verse 8c by mention of boundaries or borders.

The basis of division

That makes perfect sense until the basis of the division and the borders is mentioned. The Masoretic Text (MT), which is a compendium of trusted later manuscripts and the primary basis of most modern translations, says, “He set the boundaries according to the number of the sons of Israel.” That is the literal meaning of “bene yisra’el” in the interlinear above.

But what does that mean? Why would God assign non-Jewish territorial boundaries based on any count of the Jews? And what count of Jews would that even be, since there were no Jews at the time of Babel? And while Moses was writing the text, there were only the Israelites who were preparing to cross the Jordan.

The Samaritan Pentateuch (SamPent), which is very old, also says “sons of Israel.” But the LXX, very old, using an unknown older Hebrew manuscript, translated it, “ἀγγέλων θεοῦ”, which means “angels of God.”

Most modern English translations, including the Interlinear above, ignore the Masoretic “bene Yisrael” and go with the seemingly more logical “sons of God.” So, who are these sons of God?

  • NT references to the sons of God usually refer either to Jesus (but there is only one of Him, so those references are singular), or to Christians, usually Christians after their future resurrection.
  • Some say that the Masoretic text is correct after all, and it means “sons of Israel” in the sense of “Jews.” Either physical Israel or spiritual Israel. That would make the passage a prophetic utterance, probably referring to apportionment of the conquered Canaanite lands. The added layer of abstraction reduces its probability, in my opinion.
  • Most often in the OT it means angels.
  • Whether speaking of humans or angels, it is often translated into English as “saints.”

The seeds of Israel

To understand the background of Paul’s epistle to the Romans, it is helpful to first understand the origins of Israel as it emerged from the pagan world system that came out of Babel during the lifetime of Peleg. I’ve covered Babel fairly extensively in recent posts. In this post I’m going to expand that history to emphasize the part emergence of Israel.

Patriarchal timeline

In order to show how Israel appeared out of the Genesis 11 milieu, I need to break down the Patriarchal timeline as well as I can.

Conservative Christian and Orthodox Jewish scholarship in general insist on a strict acceptance of all the genealogies as written in our modern English translations. By choosing a known Biblical date and working back through the genealogies, Archbishop Ussher, in the 17th century BC, placed Genesis 1 and 2 in 4004 BC. A Jewish scholar, Rabbi Yossi ben Halafta, did the same thing in the 2nd century BC using some slightly different interpretations to come up with 3761 BC (see below), which is the basis for the modern Hebrew Calendar.

Unfortunately, neither of those men accounted for problems with the text. Problems, not with its authority, but with the copying process and, particularly, with interpretation.

Textual ambiguity

In a section titled “Why Ancient Biblical dates are unreliablein my last post, I pointed out several factors that cast doubt on precise Biblical timelines:

  1. Virtually all English translations of Genesis are ultimately based on the MT. The SamPent and the LXX, both much earlier (and thus presumably better) texts, were ignored.
  2. The data in the genealogies of Genesis are almost surely rounded off, using an obscure logic in some cases.
  3. My table, below, shows the age of each post-Flood Patriarch when his first son was born. In each case but Shem and Terah, the age shown by the MT is significantly (usually 100 years!) less that that shown by SamPent and LXX. Since the LXX is the version that was used in antiquity by most Jews, including the New Testament authors, it seems to me that it should be regarded as the default standard in many cases. My own presumption is that later scribal copyists dropped the first digit because they thought the advanced ages listed in the Hebrew text were too high for the Patriarchs to father a child. But Christian chronologies, including Ussher’s, are based on the MT.
  4. The LXX inserts an entire generation, Kainan, that doesn’t appear in MT or SamPent. Again, I personally would go with LXX. Kainan’s existence is attested in the non-canonical book of Jasher, mentioned in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18. (Note: There are three known manuscripts of Jasher; at least two of those are counterfeit, but the third may be from a very ancient source.)
Comparison of the genealogical data for the Patriarchs as presented in the Masoretic Text (MT), vs. the Samaritan Pentateuch (SamPent) and the Septuagint (LXX). Compiled by the author. ©Ron Thompson

Additionally, I would point out that Genesis 11:26 contains an ambiguity:

Scholars tend to assume that Terah began fathering sons at age 70 and the order of the list of sons in verses 26 and 27 is the order of their ages. Alternatively, one might assume that they are triplets. Neither is necessarily true, but unless there is another verse that gives more information, the first seems to me to be the most likely of these two alternatives.

Here’s the problem: The age of Haran is immaterial because he died in Ur, so he evidently never left for the land named after him. But the ages of Abram and Nahor are very important.

If the MT is correct (see the chart above), it would appear that Terah was 70 when Abram was born, so if Abram was 75 years old when he left the region of Haran, that means that he left when Terah was 70 + 75 = 145 years old.

How does this compare with Steven’s recounting of Abram’s life?

According to Steven’s lengthy address, centuries later, Abram didn’t leave Haran until after Terah’s death, but the chart above shows that Terah lived to be 205 years old, per both the MT and the LXX. There are two ways to resolve this contradiction:

  1. If either Nahor or Haran was born in Terah’s 70th year and Abram was born 60 years later, then the math adds up: 70 + 60 + 75 = 205.
  2. There could be another problem with the numbers in extant manuscripts.
  3. Steven could have been wrong. Scriptural inerrancy requires that Luke, as author of Acts, must quote, or at least accurately paraphrase, Steven’s statement, but not that Steven himself be correct, since presumably his sermon wasn’t inspired.

I’ll opt for the first. Triplets are unlikely, and Moses declines to list separate birth dates, so I assume they are listed in order of importance to the story. If Steven was wrong, then it only alters a date. Removing the 60-year offset tentatively puts Abram’s birth in Babel. I can’t rule it out, but the flow of events seems smoother to me if God began building His holy people after He dispersed the nations. Besides, it offends me a bit to suggest that Steven my have misspoken…

A Jewish version of the genaealogy

The following timeline of the Patriarchs (divided into two parts for readability) is from The Book of Torah Timelines, Charts and Maps. It is very similar to more familiar timelines of the Patriarchs, except that it uses Anno Mundi dating instead of Gregorian BC and AD.

Depending on the accuracy of the genealogies, discussed above and here, Terah lived during the period 1878–2083 AM (Latin Anno Mundi, “in the year of the world”). This Jewish dating system dates all events from the year of creation, Year 1 AM, which corresponds to 3761 BC on a Gregorian calendar.

Adam to Jacob timeline, part 1
Adam to Jacob timeline, part 2

I have stated many times in previous posts that I am an Old Earth Creationist so, while wholeheartedly giving Almighty God total credit for designing the universe and its laws, then placing everything into motion and maintaining its stability over the aeons, I put creation some 13.8 billion years ago. Beginning here, I make a case for the formation of Adam and Eve being a separate event from an earlier creation of pre-Adamic mankind, and here I equate that event to “Year 1 AM”, whether that is 3761 (Jewish) or 4004 (Ussher) BC.

The difference between 4004 BC and 3761 BC is 243 years, which is probably mostly due to different interpretations of the dates of the Egyptian sojourn.

Timeline observations

There are a number of very interesting observations that can be made from the timeline above:

First, pay close attention to the two horizontal dashed lines, representing the year of the Flood (1656 AM) and the year of the Dispersion from Babel (1996 AM). These two dates, 340 years apart, will be very important as I proceed.

Nimrod was probably born and began his conquests generations after the Dispersion from Babel and was most likely the historical figure Sargon of Akkad (Sargon the Great). Contrary to Christian tradition, there is no reason to assume that Nimrod was the architect of the city or Tower.

If Adam was, as we believe, the 1st generation of his line, Noah appears to be the 10th generation, about a thousand years later, and Abram (Abraham) appears to be the 20th generation, about a thousand years after Noah.

Because Noah is said to have lived for 600 years before the Flood and for 350 years after the Flood, he was no doubt in possession of just about all of the knowledge of mankind accumulated before and during his life. Certainly, he passed much of it on to his living descendants. Since there was no way to store or propagate knowledge other than word of mouth, ancient mankind before writing was very diligent about verbally passing on what was learned and memorized.

Noah lived until 10 years after the Dispersion. As discussed below, the date of the Dispersion could have been somewhat earlier. Noah could have been one of the founders of Babel, and he, as well as some of his descendants, could have been among those dispersed.

It appears from the chart above that Noah’s life overlapped that of all his descendants down to and including Abram. However, to solve the discrepancy in Terah’s age at death, I think the best solution is to add 60 years to Abram’s birth date, which removes him from both Noah’s lifespan and any likelihood of residence in sinful Babel.

I prepared the following table to show key dates, as modified in accordance with the above discussions:

My interpretation of dates for key events from the Great Flood to Abraham’s death. ©Ron Thompson

When Abram was born, almost all of the post-Flood patriarchs before him were still alive. Only Noah, Peleg and Nachor were gone. Think of all the teachers Abram had at his disposal! If they were all together (see below for more on that subject), then one might have seen eight generations of the same family sitting on a single log!

Off to Babel

Interplay between the generations also depends on whether or not Abram and his ancestors were living in proximity to each other. I think the most likely answer to that question is “probably yes.” We know that in ancient times clans tended to stay together.

Ararat to Bable

The question then becomes, where did this patriarchal band go after the Flood?

I previously wrote that “I think it likely that Noah’s family hung around the Ark while long distance travel was greatly impeded [by slowly receding flood waters]. Then perhaps years later, as plant life reemerged in the wake of the falling water, it became easier to move, and they began scattering along the highlands and living as nomads over a larger and larger range.”

The incident of Noah’s drunkenness probably sets a lower limit of three years for their sedentary life in the highlands, because that is how long it usually takes for a vineyard to become fruitful after planting. In reality, since they had put down some roots (including the vine roots!), they probably didn’t rush off after the first grape harvest.

Technically, nomadism is a cyclic lifestyle wherein a band of families move back and forth or over a specific area, exploiting available pastureland and gatherable resources. Logistically, such bands are unwieldy if they exceed a hundred members.

Noah’s band, however, were probably moving slowly, if not sporadically, living off the land and seeking familiar territory in which to resettle. Technically, this isn’t “nomadism,” but rather “human migration.” Any groups that splintered off from the main migratory “herd” and went their own way would have probably been mostly subclans of non-inheriting younger sons.

Were Noah and his descendants leading the group that founded Babel and built the Tower? In my opinion, the younger generations were probably likely to be in power at Babel, rather than the aging Noah. After possibly 300+ years, there was certainly factionalism and group politics. I can’t lay the blame on anyone in particular, Patriarch or dissenter.

Timing of the Dispersion

All that the Bible says about the timing of the Dispersion is that it was during the lifetime of Peleg (1757–1996 AM). After doing a ton of research in my own library (including Jasher) and online, I found no convincing arguments to narrow that span. My sense is that many Christian writers simply assume that it happened in the year of Peleg’s birth, while almost all Jewish writers, based on a long-standing rabbinic tradition, assume that it happened in the year of his death. Lacking no better clue, I would opt for the latter or at least something late in Peleg’s life. Why?

The at-birth view allows only 101 years from Flood to Dispersion. Although that is a long time in modern human-life-years, it seems to me that the abatement of the Flood waters and the migration of the people would have taken longer. Pretty subjective, I realize. To put a number to it, using a rule of thumb population growth factor of 5% per year per person, I calculate that by the time the original 8 from the Ark reached Shinar, they would have produced a population of

8 * 1.05101 = 1,104 people,

including women and children, probably not enough manpower to build the city and the big tower in the time allotted.

Today’s population growth rate is, on average, less than half of that 5%, but in my own genealogy, which I’ve only followed to AD 1200, it was much higher in the past than now. If you think 5% is too conservative for ancient people with long lives, I’d suggest:

  • The period of fecund years in that age wasn’t as expanded as the period of total life.
  • Birth numbers would be balanced somewhat by groups peeling off to go their own way.
  • I personally doubt that everyone lived the same long lifetimes as the Patriarchs.

Meanwhile, the at-death view allows 340 years, which makes more sense to me. It allows much more time for the migration, and the eight original ark passengers have theoretically become a huge crowd. The same formula used above yields 128 million souls minus however many have died or left the group over the period.

8 * 1.05340 = 128 million people,

probably not doable unless they travelled in waves. If the timeline is more or less correct, then the migration must have taken a majority of the 340 years between Flood and Dispersion, and all the Patriarchs from Noah through Terah (except for Serug who died early), may have been there to witness the building of the city and the Tower, and then to be driven out by God. Terah and perhaps most or all of the others ended up in Ur during the Gutian period, and Abram was born soon after.

Mechanism of the Dispersion

By what means did God drive the residents out of Babel to their new homelands? As stated in the previous article and above, Yahweh assigned angelic “Princes” to shepherd the new nations that were formed when he “confounded the tongues” of the people of Babel and set new boundaries for their habitation, i.e., He sent them to colonize areas of His own choosing. Surely it was these new Princes that He used to drive them to their assigned destinations.

Because these angelic Princes, with their angelic “superpowers”, either were corrupt from the beginning, or rapidly became corrupt, they quickly induced their human subjects to worship them as gods.

We have no information regarding the mode or modes of travel used during the actual scattering process. It could have been instantaneous, by supernatural power, but given that it was done under Divine judgement, my own supposition is that it would have been a forced march, much like the marches of the northern Israelites and southern Judahites into foreign exile.

If Peleg was the leader of the Tower builders, his death may have been during his march, or retribution for the consequences that the scattered people suffered. If either of those is the case, then it justifies the at-death placement of the Dispersion line on the chart.

However, assuming that Babel was ancient Eridu and that that city is sited as shown on the following map, travel between there and Ur can’t have been as difficult for the patriarchal line, if indeed they were living in Babel.

Sargon’s (Nimrod’s) Akkadian Empire. Ur and Eridu (Babel) are shown very close to each other near the head of the Persian Gulf, which at that time is believed to have projected much farther northwest that presently.

Abram

Abram was born around 2008 AM (1996 BC, Ussher) during the time of the Gutian Empire. Biblical hints lead me to speculate that he and his family were nomadic sheep herders in the region of the Ur city-state when his first call came.

If, as I believe, Deuteronomy 32:8 describes the Dispersion, and we accept the hypothetical date of 1996 AM (1765 BC) for that event, then we might say that verse 9 is set in motion when Abram was born, just 12 years later!

Looking at it this way, ancient history doesn’t seem quite so ancient to me.

Patriarchal worship

As discussed above, the Dispersion from Babel occurred during the time of Peleg, five generations after Noah. All of Peleg’s forefathers up to and including Noah, were alive during Peleg’s entire lifespan. As I speculated above, most of those first generations of patriarchs probably lived in Babel and experienced the Dispersion firsthand. Looking the other direction in the genealogy, it is also quite likely that the four generations following Peleg, down through Terah, also experienced the Dispersion firsthand.

Does this mean that these patriarchs were all uniformly evil? Not at all. We are not told that there were no righteous men in Babel. Centuries later, all of the Israelites were forced to wander the desert for 40 years because 10 out of 12 spies, and many (but certainly not all) of the adults in camp, failed to trust God. Still more centuries after that, not all of the Jews in the north who perished or were enslaved at the hands of the Assyrians were guilty. The same applies to southern Jews who fell to Babylonia.

I have often heard it said that Abram worshipped the pagan gods of Ur before his call. We don’t know that. We do know that his father and his grandfather did:

They no doubt worshipped the current regional gods, Enlil and others. I suspect that Abram probably worshipped Yahweh as well as the other gods at this point, and probably did until God “cut the covenant” with him in:

At least some of Abram’s living forefathers were probably worshippers of Yahweh, as Noah was. I have no doubt that Abram’s knowledge of the events at Babel was extensive. So even if he did worship Terah’s gods, he was aware of Yahweh and His power. He probably can’t have been highly resistant to an eventual change of allegiance.

Abram’s journey

Abram’s first call is recorded in Acts 7, but not in Genesis. It is presumptuous to assume that Terah left Ur with his whole family because of Abram’s call.

Note that Yahweh did not tell Abram where he was to go. He just told him to leave Ur and implicitly promised to show him when to stop.

By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going.
— Hebrews 11:8 (ESV)

I presume that the plan to move to Canaan with his whole living family was Terah’s, not Abram’s. Whether Terah received a call of his own seems doubtful since he didn’t finish the trip. He may have heard that Canaan was more fertile and had better grass for grazing than Shinar. At any rate, they stopped in a fertile area of northwest Mesopotamia (northern Syria today), which Terah named for his dead son, Haran, Lot’s father.

Abram may have stayed in Haran for years waiting for further instructions. Then came his second call, evidently at the time of Terah’s death:

1 Now the LORD said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”

4 So Abram went, as the LORD had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran.
— Genesis 12:1-4 (ESV)

Abram left with his own wife, nephew and retinue to complete Terah’s originally planned migration to Canaan. Only when they arrived did God say, “this is the place.

Abram stopped there and built an altar, but then he moved on to the “hill country between Bethel … and Ai” and built another. By the way, Ai and the final letters of the Anglicized Sarai, employ a Hebrew diphthong, pronounced “Eye”, not “Aye-eye” as I’ve heard probably hundreds of times.

Why the move from Shechem to Bethel? God had not yet revealed the extent of the promised land, so it may have been rebellious of Abram to keep moving beyond Shechem at that time.

Then he kept going. Out of the fertile hill country and into the arid Negeb desert! Perhaps he thought there were too many people in the hills, or perhaps that area was too green and forested for his taste. I grew up in the desert, but from a very young age, I fished mountain waters with my dad, and I always yearned for trees and rain. Yet I’ve met people who moved from desert to forest and felt completely out of place and claustrophobic.

Romans 1

The following is my outline of Paul’s epistle to the Romans:

  1. Greetings and personal notes, 1:1–15.
  2. A unifying theology of righteousness through faith, 1:16–8:39.
  3. Paul’s burden for Israel, 9:1–11:11.
  4. Gentiles and Jews together, 11:12–36.
  5. Christian ethics for all, 12:1–15:13.
  6. Paul’s closing statements, 15:14–16:27.

A careful student can detect traces of Babel throughout both the Old and the New Testaments. I have decided to limit my NT discussion to just Romans 1.

The apostle Paul usually wrote his epistles to the various churches in order to address issues that were causing unrest in their congregations or damaging their witness to the world around them.

The problem in the roman churches

The problem besetting the Roman church was enmity between Jewish and non-Jewish members. The local church at Rome was a microcosm of the diverse Universal Church, so the former is a good case study for understanding the challenges of the latter.

Paul’s primary reason for writing his letter to Rome, then, was to act as a peacemaker between the Jewish and Gentile believers in the Roman churches (in a city of that size there were likely more than one).

Enmity between equals

Paul never “converted” from Judaism to Christianity! For a Jew to become Messianic was not a conversion! It was simply coming to a full understanding of the prophetic underpinnings of the Jewish covenantal relationship with Jahweh. Calling it a “conversion” is at best ignorant, and at worst antisemitic.

Historically, for non-Jews to enter into full fellowship with Jews, there was a process. Non-Jews could be “naturalized” into Judaism by undergoing certain rites, notably buying into the Jewish faith in Yahweh, ritual cleansing through immersion, and circumcision of men—and then submitting to the full body of Jewish ritual life.

Usually (but not always) these converts to Judaism were fairly well received by “native” Jews. By the 1st century, “Israel” was already a somewhat mongrelized race, due to centuries of intermarriage.

There was also a virtual “green card” situation, as well. A non-Jew could live peacefully among Jews as a גֵּר (ger, “alien, sojourner, stranger”) and enjoy limited fellowship, even within Jewish homes. At a minimum, a ger was expected to keep the so-called Noachide Laws, a version of which was cited by James, in Acts 15, and to avoid flaunting the Jewish laws and customs.

Melding the two

On his missionary journeys, Paul’s habit was to first approach the Jewish synagogues and preach to their congregations, then to expand his approach to gentiles in the community. Where did the new believers then meet together?

The normal early practice of Jewish believers (Messianic Jews), in Jerusalem and in the Diaspora alike, was to continue their normal Sabbath activities in the synagogues alongside non-Messianic Jews, then at dusk, at the close of Shabbat, the Messianics would adjourn to private homes to meet and fellowship together until well into the night.

It is unlikely that gentile believers, ger, would be welcomed into the synagogues, but Messianic Jews were still Jews. The ger would join the Jewish believers at homes after the synagogues closed for the night where they would discuss the new realities brought by Yeshua Hamashiach.

This was of course a great demonstration of the intercultural tolerance demanded by Paul. Nevertheless, the past centuries of enmity probably led to considerable friction.

In AD 49, Emperor Claudius expelled all Jews from the City of Rome, including Messianic believers. When the expulsion was ended after Claudius’ death in AD 54, two to four years before Paul’s letter, those Jews who returned found that Gentile believers had taken over their synagogues, and the result was increased bad blood between the returning Messianic Jews and the gentile usurpers.

The format of the Roman epistle

Due to the nature of the problem and given the arguments Paul wished to present, the letter sometimes addresses the Jews directly, sometimes the gentiles, and sometimes he addressed them all as fellow believers.

The letter as a whole, of course, is addressed to all:

Some confusion results when comparing verse 7 with verse 13:

As translated, this verse implies that the letter is written only to non-Jews. The problem is that the Greek ἔθνεσιν (ethnesin) at the end of the verse, and even the familiar English term, “gentiles,” can refer to “non-Jews“, or to “nations“, to “peoples“, or even to “pagans“.

The English Standard Version and almost all other English versions translate it in this particular verse as “gentiles.” In this context, I think that the ambiguity is handled much better by Young’s Literal Translation and a few others:

Even that doesn’t quite work for me, though. Most people probably think of “nation” as synonymous with “country” or “state,” but to me the term implies an ethnic commonality. I would probably prefer the word “peoples” in this context, because I think Paul was referring to people of all ethnicities and languages outside of Rome itself.

Note in passing that where Paul wants to refer specifically to non-Jews as opposed to Jews, he normally uses the term Ἕλλησίν (Hellēsin), i.e., Greek-speaking peoples, as opposed to Hebrews. See, for example, verse 16:

Unfortunately, my personal favorite everyday translation, the Complete Jewish Bible, muddies the water by paraphrasing that as “to the Jew especially, but equally to the Gentile.” Ignoring the unintended derogatory “I’m more equal than you” slant, I don’t consider the translation of Hellēni as “gentile” to be linguistically correct there.

Romans 1:18–32, God and the pagan world

Although there is much more to the topic of Babel in Paul’s letters, I’m going to concentrate on this particular passage.

After his customary greetings and well-wishes at the beginning of the letter (verses 1–15), Paul expresses his confidence in the Gospel and the imputed righteousness it brings to those who place their faith in that Gospel (verses 16–17).

He then immediately gets down to business, reminding the Romans in the rest of chapter 1 of the blatant sin and arrogance displayed by the unrighteous, and announcing that God had given up on them.

Exactly whom did God give up on, and when did he do it?

Evidently this is speaking corporately, not of individuals. I recognize three occasions past and one future when He gave or will give up on mankind in general:

  1. The first occasion was when He kicked the Adam Family out of the Garden and cursed the ground. This was catastrophic, because the Garden was a tabernacle over which Adam was priest. His task was to ultimately spread that paradise over the planet. Recognizing that God is never surprised or defeated, and that everything that happens “works together for good”—in the sense that His ultimate plan was “foiled” by Adam’s sin, the desired end was delayed by, so far, six millennia. I believe that Antichrist is alive and rapidly increasing in power, and Tribulation will come soon. I also believe in a Millennial Reign of Messiah on earth, but that will not yet bring paradise to earth. Paradise will come only with the Eternal State.
  2. Ten human generations later came mankind’s first and only “extinction event”, the Great Flood. This came as a result of rampant sin by humans and angels. Among the humans, perhaps there were others that were righteous in God’s eyes (some ancient traditions hold that Methuselah, who died either right before or as a result of the Flood, was a righteous mentor to Noah), but only one “found grace in the eyes Yahweh,” so only he and his immediate family were allowed to escape to reseed the race.
  3. The third came after another ten human generations: the Dispersion from Babel. This could not be punished in the same ways as the first two (see Genesis 8:21, below). The result of this one was that the race of man became fragmented, and the fragments delivered over to corrupt angelic leadership.
  4. The fourth will be the Tribulation period of Eschatology.

I presume that Paul is referring to the third of the above judgements, since the fourth has not come yet and the first and second are old news and can never be repeated due to the promise in Genesis 8:21:

The Gospel, faith, and righteousness (1:16–17)

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.”
— Romans 1:16-17 (ESV)

That is, Paul has complete confidence in the Gospel which he has given his allegiance to (i.e., he feels no shame or disappointment in them), to save all who believe, whether Jewish or not, though it was presented to the Jews first. The Gospel reveals the righteousness of God in us as we live by faith. The difficult phrase in verse 17, pisteōs eis pistin, literally “by faith unto faith” probably means something like “faith and nothing but faith” (New Bible Commentary) or, by “faith from start to finish” (UBS Translators’ Handbook).

Verses 16–17 is one side of the coin, God’s gracious gift to the righteous.

The other side of that coin presents God’s wrath and abandonment of the unrighteous.

No excuses! (1:18–23)

The Gospel of God’s grace is presented (a) in the life, death and resurrection of the Messiah; (b) in the Tanakh—the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings of the OT; and (c) in the visible wonder of His creation. This Gospel reveals the righteous nature of God, His expectations for His created Imagers (mankind), and the retribution to be delivered on those who pervert those things by their unrighteousness.

18 For the wrath [vengeance] of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things [literally, reptiles].
— Romans 1:18-23 (ESV)

Because of all the revelation which was available to them, they were well aware of His existence and His power (verse 21), they chose to treat Him as an adversary. “We know who you are and what you have done, but we owe you nothing! We are now many and powerful, too, and we will worship whatever gods we choose and do whatever we want to do, whether you like it or not!”

Abandoned by God (1:24–32)

Verses 24–32 describe the results of those choices.

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
— Romans 1:24-25 (ESV)

They chose to disrespect God, to discount His anger, and to seek pleasure personal pleasure over righteousness.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
— Romans 1:26-27 (ESV)

Why the emphasis on homosexuality? Because throughout history nations have started with idealistic vision and good intentions, but as they age, the rulers and the ruled alike become cynical and self-serving, religious fervor wanes and becomes corrupt, and jealousies become exaggerated. Like mold finding its way into the refrigerator, sin begins to take root and spread out of control. Because sexual drives are so powerful, human beings, like the angelic “watchers” in Genesis 6, eventually seek new and forbidden thrills. Inevitably, the end result is a crumbling society.

Eventually, it is internal corruption that kills nations and empires. And one sure sign of that corruption is a radical decline in morals, which is almost always visible in widespread sexual deviance and declining respect for human life. This is well-known in Greek and Roman history and is obvious around the world today.

Was it the same in the earliest days of human history? The story of Sodom and Gomorrah tell us that it definitely was! Although I can’t cite Scripture to support this undisputably, I believe that the passage above implies that it was true for Babel as well.

Defying God may start with sexual depravity. but it is soon followed by all manners of sinful behavior.

28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
— Romans 1:28-32 (ESV)

Which is why I believe that God gave up on humanity one more time by scattering them, confounding the languages that held them together, and putting them under the care of inferior gods.


Historic Anchors for Israel in Egypt

Posted on:

Modified on:


  1. Middle Kingdom, 12th Dynasty
    1. Pharaoh Amenemhat II, 1911-1877/1929-1895 BC
    2. Pharaoh Senusret II, 1877-1870/1897-1878 BC
    3. Pharaoh Senusret III, 1870-1831/1878-1839 BC
    4. Late 12th Dynasty
  2. Hyksos Period
  3. Enslavement
  4. New Kingdom, 18th Dynasty
    1. Pharaoh Amenhotep I, 1532-1511 BC
    2. Pharaoh Thutmose I, 1511-1498 BC
    3. Pharaoh Thutmose II, 1498-1485 BC
    4. Pharaoh Hatshepsut, 1485-1464 BC
    5. Pharaoh Thutmose III, 1464-1431 BC
    6. Pharoah Amenhotep II, 1431-1406

I am presenting here a list of dates for key events in Egyptian/Biblical history. Dating of Biblical events during the Egyptian period is very firm, if you believe as I do that the Bible is inerrant and its time references are literal. Dating of the Egyptian King Lists is more problematic, as I will discuss below.

Middle Kingdom, 12th Dynasty

Dating the reigns of Middle Kingdom monarchs is particularly difficult, with a particularly large range of proposed possibilities. I have a fairly large library of Egyptian history. In this post I will list, separated by slashes, two of the newest chronologies that seem reasonable: First is the timeline presented by Van De Mieroop in A History of Ancient Egypt; second, the one I personally prefer, taken from the Wikipedia article, “Twelfth Dynasty of Egypt”, as last edited on 21 December 2021. A radically different chronology by Egyptologist David Rohl, has recently been popularized by the Patterns of Evidence series of videos. I plan to review this series in the near future, but for now, I like most of what is presented in the first two videos, but not so much the second two or the anticipated fifth. Rohl, a self-styled agnostic, follows the lead of various evangelical scholars who shorten the period of the Hebrew “sojourn” in Egypt from the explicitly stated 430 years to 350 years, based on what I believe is a simplistic misunderstanding of the Abrahamic Covenant.


Egypt’s capital throughout the 12th Dynasty period was located in ancient Itj-Tawy, located around 35 miles south of modern Cairo and 21 miles south of ancient Memphis.

Pharaoh Amenemhat II, 1911-1877/1929-1895 BC

Joseph was sold into slavery in Egypt around 1899 BC, at 17 years old (Gen 37:2-29). Most of my sources would put this event somewhere in Amenemhat’s reign. I would place the timing shortly before a brief coregency of Amenemhat and Senusret II.

Pharaoh Senusret II, 1877-1870/1897-1878 BC

Joseph languished in Egyptian slavery and prison for some 13 years before he “stood before Pharoah” at age 30 (1886 BC) to interpret Pharaoh’s dream and to be elevated to Vizier rank (Gen 41:46). By my accounting, this Pharaoh was Senusret II, who seems to have devoted the final eight years of his reign to promoting Joseph’s recommendations for the productive years. Domestically, he is best known for developing the Fayyum Basin area west of the capital. This is a basin watered by a natural offshoot of the Nile, anachronistically named Bahr Yussef (“the Waterway of Joseph”). Although widening of this waterway was done well before the Middle Kingdom era, Senusret built numerous canals for irrigation and to control the levels of the valley’s Lake Moeris for the purpose of land reclamation. He also built new settlements in the center and around the borders of Egypt and appears to have greatly expanded his bureaucracy in these regions. Regarding foreign affairs, he is known to have fostered a period of peaceful trade with the hated “Asiatics” of the Levant.

Pharaoh Senusret III, 1870-1831/1878-1839 BC

This powerful Pharaoh began his reign about eight years after the elevation of Joseph. I believe that his story is told in

Genesis 41:54-57 (CJB)
[54] and the seven years of famine began to come, just as Yosef had said. There was famine in all lands, but throughout the land of Egypt there was food. [55] When the whole land of Egypt started feeling the famine, the people cried to Pharaoh for food, and Pharaoh said to all the Egyptians, “Go to Yosef, and do what he tells you to do.” [56] The famine was over all the earth, but then Yosef opened all the storehouses and sold food to the Egyptians, since the famine was severe in the land of Egypt. [57] Moreover all countries came to Egypt to Yosef to buy grain, because the famine was severe throughout the earth.

Senusret III, ©MET Museum NYC

Senusret continued the agricultural developments begun by his father and attempted to maintain peace within Egypt and with Egypt’s neighbors, but the balance of power within Egypt changed radically during his reign. Since no later than the 3rd Dynasty, Egypt had been divided into individual districts called “nomes“, each ruled by a hereditary “nomarch“. These powerful nobles had decentralized Egyptian rule and placed limits on the Pharaohs. Senusret III seems to have used the famine years and his monopolistic control of Joseph’s well-stocked granaries to break the economic power of the nomarchs and to recentralize power within his kingdom.

In 1876 BC, near the beginning of the famine years, Jacob and the rest of his family and their retinues moved to Egypt (Gen 46:1-47:9). Why were they offered seemingly prime space in the fertile land of Goshen, the eastern Nile Delta region? Was this land gift purely out of Pharaoh’s love for Joseph? I doubt it. Their “Asiatic” origins were a heavy strike against them. They ignored Joseph’s warning not to mention that they were shepherds. Egypt’s herds were cattle, and sheep tend to overgraze pastures and make them unsuitable for raising cattle.

Late 12th Dynasty

Joseph died at 130 years old, in 1806 BC, having lived in Egypt after the famine during the reigns of Senusret III, Amenemhat III, and Amenemhat IV. Queen Sobekneferu was just coming into power for a brief, 4-year reign.

To Top

Hyksos Period

Hyksos Cities in Lower Egypt

While there is no question that the 12th Dynasty Pharaohs recognized Joseph’s wisdom and supported his programs as Vizier, as mentioned above, I personally have reservations about the sincerity of their welcome of his Hebrew family. Senusret III, in particular, hated the Nubians of Africa and was at best ambivalent about “Asiatics”—foreigners from eastern Mediterranean lands, many of whom had been infiltrating Lower Egypt for generations. I suspect that the Pharaohs’ invitation to Jacob and their tolerance of the Hebrews was more to keep Joseph happy and his relatives under observation.

At the close of the chaotic 14th Dynasty, a group of Asiatics, speaking an Aramaic/Canaanite west-Semitic dialect, took control of Egypt. They came to be called “Hyksos“, meaning “the rulers of foreign lands”. They were settled throughout Goshen and along the Lower Nile Valley, with scattered settlements into Upper Egypt. Dynasties 15, 16 and 17 consisted primarily of Hyksos rulers with their capital first in the eastern Nile Delta city of Avaris, and later in Thebes. They were not deposed until Amose I, founder of the 18th Dynasty, unseated them. He and his successors eventually drove them out of Egypt.

To Top

Enslavement

Aside from secular and Deistic theories that equate the Hyksos with the Hebrews, I have never seen or heard a discussion of the inevitable dispersal of the Israelites in Egypt during the Hyksos rule and early 18th Dynastic period. Exodus 1:5-7 implies that the original 70 “sons of Israel” had multiplied until they occupied not just Goshen, but rather “filled” all of the habitable land of Egypt. I imagine that they were displaced completely from Goshen itself, but in any case, as slaves they would have been required to concentrate close to where they worked. By Moses’ time, most of their work would certainly be in Upper Egypt, except at flood times. Travel from the Delta to Thebes by foot would probably have taken them around two weeks, at best. Without any archaeological or written records either way, I am assuming that the bulk of the slaves were sheltering along the Nile wherever they were needed at any given time.

Exodus 1:7-21 covers an undatable period of history after the death of Joseph and before the birth of Moses. A traditional understanding of the chapter assumes that the entire passage describes a single wicked Pharaoh, but I would rather divide it as follows:

  • the Pharaoh who “did not know Joseph”, and who ordered their enslavement—possibly as early as late in the 12th Dynasty (Ex 1:8-11);
  • a long period of increasing oppression and further population expansion (Ex 1:12-14); and
  • the Pharaoh who, during that period, tasked the midwives to kill Israelite boys (Ex 1:15-21).

To Top

New Kingdom, 18th Dynasty

Most scholars today use a Conventional Egyptian Chronology for this period. The currently popular Patterns of Evidence series is pushing David Rohl’s alternative “New Chronology”, which most Egyptologists agree is way off the mark. Within the 18th Dynasty, the Conventional view has two primary variations, due to an ambiguity in tying the ancient Egyptian calendar to our Gregorian calendar. The so-called “Low Chronology“, which is most popular, contains later dating; use of the “High Chronology” results in dates 20 years earlier. Personally, I prefer a variation of the Low Chronology, as presented by Christian Egyptologist, Kenneth Kitchen. Though I don’t agree with his conclusions about Biblical dating, his Egyptian dating seems to me to fit better with the Biblical narrative as I interpret it.

Pharaoh Amenhotep I, 1532-1511 BC

Moses was born in 1526 BC, by Kitchen’s Chronology, during the 6th year of Amenhotep’s reign. The order to throw newborn boys into the Nile was probably issued shortly before that time, so it is safe to say it was Amenhotep’s order (Ex 1:22). There is a problem with this chronology, though: the following passage (Ex 2:1-11) states several times that it was “Pharaoh’s daughter” who rescued Moses and later adopted him, but Amenhotep had no male or female heirs at all except for one son, who died at a very early age. If the dating is correct, then this wording can still be regarded as correct if she was the daughter of either a past or future Pharaoh. There is precedent for this type of royal ambiguity both in scripture and in other ancient writings. If so, there are three possible scenarios:

  • She could have been a daughter of Amenhotep’s father, Pharaoh Ahmose I. Ahmose had 12 children, including several daughters, but those who survived to 1526 would have been fairly old by the standards of the day. I think it would have been unlikely that any of them would be at the river under these circumstances.
  • Amenhotep was succeeded by Thutmose I, who was a military figure and not related to him at all. Thutmose did indeed have a daughter, Hatshepsut, who was 16 years old in 1526, and was suitable for other reasons, as well. See below.
  • Thutmose might have been considered the current Pharaoh if he was coregent with Amenhotep. This would not have been unusual, and there is some evidence of a coregency; but it would have to have lasted at least 15 years, which is very unlikely.
Pharaoh Thutmose I, 1511-1498 BC

Thutmose’ birth date and parentage are unknown. Amenhotep died without an heir, and it is likely that Thutmose, probably close to Amenhotep’s age, was promoted from a senior military position. Thutmose had five children over his lifetime, of which three died before his accession. His daughter, Hatshepsut, was born around 1541 BC, in the 16th year of Ahmose I’s reign. She would have been 16 years old when Moses was born, in the 6th year of Amenhotep’s reign, which certainly would have made her the ideal candidate for the (eventual) “Pharoah’s Daughter”. When Thutmose became Pharaoh, Moses was 15 and Hatshepsut undoubtedly a “headstrong” princess at 31 years old.

Exodus 2:5 (CJB)
[5] The daughter of Pharaoh came down to bathe in the river while her maids-in-attendance walked along the riverside. Spotting the basket among the reeds, she sent her slave-girl to get it. [6] She opened it and looked inside, and there in front of her was a crying baby boy! Moved with pity, she said, “This must be one of the Hebrews’ children.”

Pharaoh Thutmose II, 1498-1485 BC

When Thutmose I died in 1498 BC, he was replaced by his only surviving son, Thutmose II. Egyptian Pharaohs were almost always male, but succession was determined through a matriarchal system which frequently resulted in brother/sister marriages. Thutmose II was the son of Thutmose I by a minor wife, which made his claim to the throne weak. This he remedied by marrying his older half-sister, Hatshepsut, a daughter by Thutmose I’s chief wife.

Based on tradition, and possibly documentation that was available to him at the time, 1st Century Jewish historian Josephus reported that Moses was indeed a “prince of Egypt”, without question receiving the same education that any other Egyptian prince would have received in the eventuality that he might one day inherit the throne of Pharaoh. Josephus reported that Moses led the Egyptian army in at least one successful campaign against the perennial enemy in Nubia.

Although I believe that Hatshepsut was Moses‘ adoptive mother, and I have no doubt that she carefully supervised his education, I think that he later became a liability to her own ambitions. When Moses fled from Egypt in 1486, it was clear (as is evident from the state of his mummy) that Thutmose II was dying. Hatshepsut had her own plans going forward, and there may have been a risk that Moses would be seen as a viable heir. When she heard that Moses had killed an Egyptian, she had an excuse to get rid of him, either in her husband’s name or her own:

Exodus 2:15 (CJB)
[15] When Pharaoh heard of it, he tried to have Moshe put to death. But Moshe fled from Pharaoh to live in the land of Midyan.

I am not ignoring the masculine pronoun in “he tried”. Because Pharaohs were almost always male, Hatshepsut began dressing and acting as a male Pharaoh, and insisted that she was king, not queen, of Egypt. All references to her during much of her reign were masculine.

I think that Moses was savvy enough to recognize his danger. It is also significant to me that he was not sentimental about her at this point, either:

Hebrews 11:24 (CJB)
[24] By [faith], Moshe, after he had grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. [25] He chose being mistreated along with God’s people rather than enjoying the passing pleasures of sin. [26] He had come to regard abuse suffered on behalf of the Messiah as greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, for he kept his eyes fixed on the reward.

A young Hatshepsut, ©MET Museum NYC
Pharaoh Hatshepsut, 1485-1464 BC

When Thutmose II died in 1485 BC, he was succeeded by his infant son, Thutmose III, so Hatshepsut became queen regent. She reigned as actual Pharaoh for 19 years, until her own death. She is regarded by many as one of the most powerful woman monarchs of history. She died when Moses was 62 years old, roughly the midpoint of his 40 years in Midian.

Pharaoh Thutmose III, 1464-1431 BC

Thutmose III became sole ruler on Hatshepsut’s death. He is known as the “Napoleon of Egypt” for his many military campaigns and is considered to have been a military genius.

Thutmose III, ©MET Museum NYC

The Exodus and the loss of his armies occurred in 1446 BC, in approximately the 18th year of his reign after Hatshepsut’s death. His extreme reluctance to release the Hebrew slaves, despite the severity of the plagues, can probably be explained by Thutmose’s unwillingness to use potential fighting men in their place for common labor. In the few years after the Exodus, he continued his foreign invasions, and claimed great victories, but scholars discount these claims because there was apparently so little booty taken. There is no reason to assume, however, that the loss of so many of his fighting men in the Red Sea would have suppressed his military might for long.

Some commentators object to Thutmose III as the “Pharaoh of the Exodus” because they read some verses elsewhere in the Bible as stating that he had to have drowned with his army—for example:

Psalms 136:13 (CJB)
[13] to him who split apart the Sea of Suf,
for his grace continues forever;
[14] and made Isra’el cross right through it,
for his grace continues forever;
[15] but swept Pharaoh and his army into the Sea of Suf,
for his grace continues forever;

I don’t believe that this poetic description is meant to be precise; just flowery! In any case, the Hebrew text does not support the strength of the “and” interpretation.

Pharoah Amenhotep II, 1431-1406

Amenhotep was Thutmose III’s son by a minor wife. Interestingly, Thutmose’ firstborn son, Amenemhat, son of chief wife Satiah, was the heir-apparent until his death “between years 24 and 35 of Thutmose’ reign.” When accounting for the period of coregency with Hatshepsut, this conforms quite nicely with the Biblical account of the killing of the firstborn!

To Top