Scholars of antiquities would love to know the definitive answer to this question, for it bears directly on the question of who was the Pharaoh of the Exodus.   If the Pharaoh of the Exodus perished in the Red Sea, and his firstborn died before he could ascend to the throne, then these facts might point to the end of a dynasty, and help to identify the particular Pharaoh among the many candidates.
 
Some say that Pharaoh himself did not drown in the Red Sea – only his armies.  On the other hand, Flavius Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian says “And thus did all these men perish, so that there was not one man left to be a messenger of this calamity to the rest of the Egyptians”(Antiquities of the Jews, 2:16).  What does the Word say?
 

Reasonable Doubt
 
There are several texts which speak to the destruction of the Egyptians, among them Exodus 14:4:
 
And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I am the LORD. (Exodus 14:4)
 
This text is prophetic: it was spoken before the event – even before Pharaoh decided to “follow after”, that is, to pursue the departing Israelites.  At first sight, this seems to say that Pharaoh himself would be killed along with his armies, and in this way,  God would “be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host.”  This would be a great proof-text for the drowning of Pharaoh if the word translated as “and” could only mean and.  But in both Hebrew and Greek, the common word for and can also mean even.   It might be that God is anticipating the honour he will gain from destroying Pharaoh's army.  Pharaoh might conceivably, as Kings usually do, take his place on a height away from battle to observe and command.  Or he might have led the cavalry into the sea.  This cannot be determined with certainty from the text.
 
A similar uncertainty occurs in Psalm 136:15, which celebrates the victory long after.  In our Authorized Version it reads:
 
To him which divided the Red sea into parts: for his mercy endureth for ever: And made Israel to pass through the midst of it: for his mercy endureth for ever: But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red sea: for his mercy endureth for ever. (Psalms 136:13-15)
 
This might also be read “overthrew Pharaoh, even his host”.
 
The original account of the event at the Red Sea, written by Moses himself, tells us plainly that not one of the Egyptians who ventured into the sea escaped:
 
And the LORD said unto Moses, Stretch out thine hand over the sea, that the waters may come again upon the Egyptians, upon their chariots, and upon their horsemen.  And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled against it; and the LORD overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea.  And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them. (Exodus 14:26-28)
 
But it does not tell us whether Pharaoh was among them.
 
There are several verses that mention Pharaoh in the song of Moses, which he composed immediately after the event, found in Exodus 15:1-21:
 
Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. (Exodus 15:1)
 
Obviously, this is poetic description: no one was literally thrown into the sea.   And “the horse and his rider” may be generic, or rather a personification of the whole Egyptian host.  Or it could mean Pharaoh.  Who can say for sure?  Farther down, we find:
 
Pharaoh's chariots and his host hath he cast into the sea: his chosen captains also are drowned in the Red sea.  The depths have covered them: they sank into the bottom as a stone. (Exodus 15:4-5)
 
But again, no explicit reference to Pharaoh.  A little further on:
 
The enemy said, I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil; my lust shall be satisfied upon them; I will draw my sword, my hand shall destroy them.  Thou didst blow with thy wind, the sea covered them: they sank as lead in the mighty waters. (Exodus 15:9-10)
 
Once again, “the enemy” could be taken as a personal reference to Pharaoh, but it could  equally well refer to the Egyptians as a body.  Finally, there is Exodus 15:19, which reads:
 
For the horse of Pharaoh went in with his chariots and with his horsemen into the sea, and the LORD brought again the waters of the sea upon them; but the children of Israel went on dry land in the midst of the sea.  (Exodus 15:19)
 
This might seem to give the answer we seek, but John Gill pours cold water on our hopes with this comment:
 
“... Meaning not that particular and single horse on which Pharaoh was carried, but all the horses of his that drew in his chariots, and all on which his cavalry was mounted; these all went into the Red sea, following the Israelites thither.”
 
That's all I could find in the Old Testament.  In the New Testament, there is a brief note on the event in the book of Hebrews:
By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned. (Hebrews 11:29)
 
But it sheds no light on our query.


 
The Other Side
 
There seems to be no single text that unequivocally declares that Pharaoh himself was drowned in the Red Sea.  However, it would be over-hasty to dismiss the question on that basis alone.  For one thing, there is not a hint anywhere in Scripture that Pharaoh walked away from this debacle, like Yul Brynner in the movie.  That would seem odd, if he had indeed escaped with his life, wouldn't it?
 
For another, Exodus 15:9 may not be worthy of such a quick dismissal as Gill's comment suggests.  The great Reformed scholar and Hebraist may have made a mistake here.  In his day, it was common to use the word, “horse” in a military context, as a collective noun.  That is not quite the same thing as plural: the plural in English is “horses”.  One could speak of “a cavalry of five hundred horse”.  But could the Hebrew word have the same meaning?  That is the crux of the matter.  Gill gives us no proof of his contention, and none of the commentaries I consulted agree with him.
 
Furthermore, his comment is not really coherent.  The text reads “For the horse of Pharaoh went in with his chariots and with his horsemen into the sea”.  If the word horse means “all the horses of his that drew in his chariots, and all on which his cavalry was mounted”, then why would he need to say that all his horses went in to the sea with his chariots and his horsemen?  Who would ever imagine otherwise?  But if it means Pharaoh's personal steed, the sentence makes perfect sense.
 
The Greek Old Testament, or Septuagint, translated by Hellenistic Jews, before the coming of Christ, renders the word for horse in the singular.
 
Other Hebrew authorities, such as Keil and Delitzsch in their renowned critical commentary, express no doubt that Pharaoh went personally into the Red Sea, and was destroyed with his army.  In their introduction to “the song of Moses”, we read:
 
“By their glorious deliverance from the slave-house of Egypt, Jehovah had practically exalted the seed of Abraham into His own nation; and in the destruction of Pharaoh and his host, He had glorified Himself as God of the gods and King of the heathen, whom no power on earth could defy with impunity. As the fact of Israel's deliverance from the power of its oppressors is of everlasting importance to the Church of the Lord in its conflict with the ungodly powers of the world, in which the Lord continually overthrows the enemies of His kingdom, as He overthrew Pharaoh and his horsemen in the depths of the sea”
 
Their comment on 15:19 is explicit:
 
“In the words “Pharaoh's horse, with his chariots and horsemen,” Pharaoh, riding upon his horse as the leader of the army, is placed at the head of the enemies destroyed by Jehovah.”

So I conclude that Pharaoh's own horse, as distinguished from the horses of his cavalry, “went in with them”, and was with them inundated by the mighty waters:
 
For the horse of Pharaoh went in with his chariots and with his horsemen into the sea, and the LORD brought again the waters of the sea upon them; but the children of Israel went on dry land in the midst of the sea.  (Exodus
            15:19)
 
This seems to me decisive of the question, for why would his horse go in without him?And what would be the point in marking the death of Pharaoh's horse if Pharaoh himself escaped?  The song begins with these words ”I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea”(15:1).  This seems to be also the refrain of the song (see 15:21).  While the term, “the horse and his rider” can and should be understood generically, it surely does not exclude the most important horse and rider (or driver) of them all – the one who commanded them!
 
Pharaoh himself had his own personal chariot (v.6), and so may not have been riding on a horse.  When the Scripture says that “the horse of Pharaoh went in with his chariots and with his horsemen into the sea”, it might have been the horse that drew his chariot.  Heavy chariots, with more than one occupant, require two or more horses to draw, or else speed is sacrificed, so it is likely that Pharaoh drove his own light chariot.  But in view of the trouble the Egyptians had with their chariots on this occasion, it is possible that Pharaoh abandoned his chariot and continued his hot pursuit riding his horse just before the end.
 
It follows that the other verses we have considered, which did not give us the certainty we sought, should be understood in accord with this conclusion.  And should not be understood as even in these texts, and “the Egyptians” must include the King of Egypt.
 
Then thou shalt say unto thy son, We were Pharaoh's bondmen in Egypt; and the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand: And the LORD shewed signs and wonders, great and sore, upon Egypt, upon Pharaoh, and upon all his household, before our eyes: (Deuteronomy 6:21-22)
 
Thou shalt not be afraid of them: but shalt well remember what the LORD thy God did unto Pharaoh, and unto all Egypt; (Deuteronomy 7:18)


 
The Ethical Argument
 
But there is another reason why I think Pharaoh was drowned with his troops.  It has to do with his character and his acts.  This was not the Pharaoh who “knew not Joseph”, who instigated the oppression of the Hebrews, who first commanded the midwives to murder the Hebrew boys at the birthing-stool (Exodus 1:15-16), and then, when that failed, charged all his subjects to throw them into the Nile whenever they found them (Exodus 1:22).  That monster was already dead when Moses returned to Egypt.  It was another Pharaoh, who inherited the totalitarian slave-state that Egypt had become; who ratified the inhuman “Hebrew policy” of his predecessor, and augmented it by cruelties of his own (Exodus 5:7-19).  Think what it meant to the Hebrews, humiliated and crushed already, to be told that they were shirking!  And that from now on, they would have to somehow provide their own straw, without diminishing the full tally of bricks!
 
We do not know how many Hebrew children were thus sacrificed; but we do know that this means of suppressing the population also failed, through the super-abundant fertility with which God blessed his people, the persevering faithfulness of the midwives who feared God; and probably the reluctance of ordinary Egyptians to obey such a wicked law.  (For how could the children of Israel have continued to multiply at such a rate throughout the oppression, if it had been rigorously enforced?)  But there is no doubt that much innocent blood was shed by the Egyptian tyrants and their people.
 
The first of the Ten Plagues was the turning of the waters of the Nile into blood.  The last judgment of God upon Egypt was the drowning of Pharaoh and his armies in the Red Sea.  Both miracles recall the drowning of innocent Hebrew baby boys by the Egyptians.  The celebratory song of Moses uses the expressions, “the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea” (Exodus 15:1) and “Pharaoh's chariots and his host hath he cast into the sea (15:4); which are not literally true.  But these are not just arbitrary poetic exaggerations; they are expressions designed to remind us that Pharaoh had caused the Egyptians to “throw” or “cast” the Hebrew babies into the river to drown them (Exodus 1:22).
 
God was not just fighting a war against Egypt: He was avenging the blood of innocents.  It was not enough that Pharaoh's nation and army be destroyed.  The principal living offender must pay with his life for a crime so great.  Would it be right to punish the servants and spare the master?  How fitting, rather, that he at whose word so many were drowned should be drowned himself – indeed, that he should first be made so mad with impotent rage that he should, in effect, drown himself!
 
This should cause us to reflect upon the enormity and heinousness of America's sin of abortion.  What judgments are reserved for us, a nation that has probably murdered a thousand times more innocent babies than Egypt ever did?  God's vengeance, reserved for us, must be terrible indeed!
 
Howard Douglas King
May 17, 2015
 

Israel's Four Hundred and Thirty Years,
 its Four Hundred Years
And its Four Generations
 
 
40 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. 41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.
(Exodus 12:40-41)
 
This statement appears to be a notice of the fulfillment of prophecy.  The phrase “even the selfsame day it came to pass” seems to mark a particular and exact fulfillment.  This impression is confirmed by the words of the martyr Stephen:
 
17 But when the time of the promise drew nigh, which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt, 18 Till another king arose, which knew not Joseph.  (Acts 7:17-18)
 
There is no other promise of a set time that this could be, but the promise that, after four hundred years of sojourning, Abram's seed would come out of the nation that had enslaved them, and re-enter Canaan to inherit it.  There is no prophecy of a four hundred and thirty years' sojourning of the children of Israel anywhere in Scripture.  There is only the prediction of a four hundred years sojourning, in Genesis 15:13: 
 
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;
 
How can this be reconciled? 


 
The Importance of This Study
 
 
Many have used apparent discrepancies such as these to attempt to discredit the word of God.  The student of Scripture must recognize that there are not a few of them in the chronological record of Israel's history.  One difficulty is in reconciling the four hundred years in Genesis 15 with the four hundred and thirty years of Exodus 12.  Incidentally, there is the problem of the four generations mentioned in Genesis 15.  Also involved is the question of how long Israel was in slavery in Egypt.  I hope to show – not only the solutions to these difficulties, but – the proper way to address all such problems; which is to trust the Word of God to be true, accurate, and consistent with itself, and to carefully separate opinion from fact in choosing between interpretations of the text.  Then we need not be afraid to confront any of these challenges head-on.
 
Some of the conclusions may be startling; but all is founded on a literal reading of the text, and uses the simple arithmetical operations of addition and subtraction.  This is not a technical article for historians or scholars in Hebrew
and Greek.  The facts can be verified by any serious student of Scripture from his English Bible.  Some may find such a study tedious, but those who persevere will be rewarded by a deeper and more solid conviction that the Word of God is absolutely consistent and absolutely accurate.
 
The study of Bible chronology results in the construction of a system, and the refinement of that system; but we need not begin from scratch.  Others have labored, and we have entered into their labors.  The chronological system employed is essentially that of Ussher, as refined and corrected by Martin Anstey.  Anstey's magnum opus, titled Romance of Bible Chronology is a masterpiece of disciplined mental labor.  For sources, it confines itself to actual statements of Scripture, and shuns presenting guess-work as conclusions.  I have personally verified his reasoning and his calculations for all of the dates that I present as fact in this paper.  I have supplied a chronology of the period discussed in this paper following the footnotes and appendices, for ease of reference.
 

Is Four Hundred Just a Round Number?
 
Some interpreters have suggested that the “four hundred years” simply rounds off the number for the same period, defined more exactly as “four hundred and thirty years”.  But this would mean that God promised them deliverance after four hundred years of sojourning when he really meant four hundred and thirty, which is impossible.  Thirty years is a long time to be late on keeping a promise!
 
Consider the importance of this promise to the Hebrews at the time when they were in bondage in Egypt.  Joseph knew of the promise (Genesis 50:24) and implied that his brethren knew of it too, when he charged them to take his bones with them into Canaan; and he could only have learned of it from his father Jacob, or from the written family records (the source documents which Moses used to create the book of Genesis).  At the time Moses returned to Egypt from Midian, there must have been many among the children of Israel who knew the prophecy.  They would have known from the promise recorded in Genesis 15:13-16 that the time of Israel's deliverance was at hand.
 
13 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; 14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.  15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.  16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full. (Genesis 15:13-16)   
 
Not only was the four hundred years of verse 13 ending (of which more later), but the generation then living was the fourth since Jacob had come down with his family to Egypt, in the time of Joseph.  They also must have had some idea of the deliverance from servitude foretold in verse 14.  This prophecy must have been much on the minds of the pious Hebrews.  It would have lent credit to Moses' claim to be a God-appointed deliverer.  (Yet for all that, the body of the people was too demoralized to believe Moses at first.  The ten plagues may have been as necessary to prepare Israel for God's deliverance as they were to destroy Egypt's power to resist.)

In view of the importance of the prophecy to the generation suffering oppression and hoping for deliverance at a particular time, it is unthinkable that the four hundred years could have meant anything but the precise number of years until Israel's deliverance.  Nothing less than the faithfulness of God was at stake.  The solution must rather be that there are two distinct and well-defined periods – a longer and a shorter – that share the same point of termination, as we shall see.


 
The Four Generations
 
 
13 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; 14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance. 15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.  16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full. (Genesis 15:13-16)
 
God had told Abram already (Genesis 12:7) that his seed would inherit the land of Canaan.  In chapter 15, he is told that there will be four hundred years in which his seed will be strangers “in a land that is not theirs” before they come into the possession of the promised land.  But they would come back to Canaan to possess it “in the fourth generation”.  What does this mean?
 
Many assume that these four generations run concurrently with the four hundred years, and this is a natural assumption.  In this case, the length of a patriarchal generation would be reckoned at one hundred years.1  But there are major problems with this view.  First, Isaac was born in his father's one hundredth year.  This was considered (and was in fact) a miracle.  It would be strange indeed to reckon as a normal generation something so exceptional.  Second, there were six actual generations of the seed of Abraham before the Exodus, at least in the line of Moses: Isaac, Jacob, Levi, Kohath, Amram, Moses (See Exodus 6:16-20).
 
A better solution is to count the four generations from the entry of Israel into Egypt.  The first Israelite to dwell in Egypt was Joseph, and so his generation (that of the twelve sons of Jacob) may be counted as the first, even though Jacob came with his sons and their families.  Scripture gives us Moses' genealogy; and it shows that Levi's son Kohath sired Amram, the father of Moses.  Levi, Kohath, Amram, Moses: that makes four generations.  The starting point for the counting of the four generations is Israel's entrance into Egypt, because what is being spoken of in Genesis 15 is when they will come out.   “But in the fourth generation (in Egypt) they shall come hither again”.
 
Not all the tribes had passed through just four generations at the time of the Exodus; but Moses and Aaron were their chief men, and this is enough reason to count the generations in the tribe of Levi for all Israel.  There were four generations in the line of the Deliverer. 
 
It is also possible that the word, “generation” in the prophecy of Genesis 15 was used to denote the time of a typical or average generation.  In Abram's day, it was certainly less than a hundred years, but also more than forty.  It may be that sixty years was reckoned as a normal generation during this period.  In that case, the Exodus would have been in the fourth generation from the going-down into Egypt. 
 
But it would be odd to speak in this manner.  Normally, when a generation is spoken of as a second, third, fourth, etc. it means the number of successive births in a bloodline.  Also, the life expectancy of man was still declining fairly rapidly, as it had ever since the flood of Noah.  So there was no long period of predictable lifespans from which to infer an average generational time period, as in David's time.
 
It is true that this prediction is not explicit about the relocation of Israel into Egypt, but though the years of the sojourning run continuously, the distinction between the periods in Canaan and in Egypt is necessarily implied in verses 14-16:
 
14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance... 16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.
 
Abram's seed would come into existence, and begin their sojourn, in the land where he was when this prophecy was given to him, in Canaan, the land of the Amorites; but here Abram's seed are contemplated as living somewhere else for the latter part of the four hundred years.  From thence shall they “come hither again”.  This necessarily implies that they have left Canaan.

Their return to Canaan will be to judge the Amorites; but it is not time for that yet.  God is going to let them fill up the measure of their iniquity for four more centuries before He puts an end to it by sending in His army, the “hosts” of Israel, to execute His judgment on them.
 
In the meantime, He is going to preserve and provide for His people while He greatly multiplies them, by sending them into Egypt, called in verse 14 “that nation whom they shall serve”.   At the right time, God “will judge” Egypt, and Israel will then “spoil” the Egyptians (a term which implies that they were an army that had been victorious in a war against their captors) and “come out with great substance”.  All of this was literally fulfilled!


 
The Four Hundred and Thirty Years
 
So far, so good, but what about the four hundred versus the four hundred and thirty? 
The first thing to observe is that both of these periods definitely terminate at the Exodus from Egypt; but neither one begins at the entrance into Egypt.  To show when each of them started, I will consider the longer period first.
 
The four hundred and thirty years is the entire period from the time the covenant promises were given to Abraham, just before he went into Canaan, until the giving of the law, in the same year as the Exodus.  This fact is proved by Galatians 3:17, which I now quote in its context:
 
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. (Galatians  3:15-18)
 
The covenant promise referred to in verse 17 is this one, given in the preceding context:
And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. (Galatians 3:8)
 
This promise, recorded in Genesis 12:3, was given when Abram was in Haran (verse 4) and he entered Canaan in the same year:
 
1 Now the LORD said 2 unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: 2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. 4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. (Genesis 12:1-4)

Therefore, the four hundred and thirty years clearly extends from this year, the year in which Abram's sojourning began, to the year of the Exodus.  Notice the careful wording Moses uses in Exodus 12:40: “Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years”.  He does not say, ”the sojourning in Egypt”, but “the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt”.
 
The expression, “the children of Israel” in this case must include Abraham himself, as well as Isaac and Jacob.  Those who were literally “the children of Israel” – that is, Jacob's children – had only been in existence for less than two hundred and sixty years at the Exodus.  For Jacob wasn't even married until 2252 A.M.3 , and the Exodus was in 2513.  (2513 – 2252 = 261.)  Abram and his seed are here being viewed as organically one – as one family or nation, here called “the children of Israel”.  This term, first used by Moses in Genesis 32:32, appears about six hundred times in the historical books of the Old Testament as a standard term for the nation of Israel.


 
The Four Hundred Years
 
We have seen that the whole time of Israel's “sojourning” in the lands of others (Canaan and Egypt) was four hundred and thirty years.  What about the four hundred years?  This is pretty straightforward, with just a few minor complications.  Basically, this shorter period is reckoned from the appearance in history of the promised seed of Abraham (namely Isaac) until the Exodus.  It is the period when Abraham's seed would live as strangers in a land that was not theirs.  The difference of thirty years is accounted for by the time when
Abram was in Canaan, before the seed came, through whom the covenant promises would be realized.  Let us recall the exact words of the prophecy:
 
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; (Genesis 15:13)
 
Even though Abraham already had a son named Ishmael when Isaac was born, God told him that the seed of promise had to come through Isaac:
 
19 And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee!
20 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.  21 And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year. (Genesis 17:19-21)
 
Until Isaac was born, there was no “seed of Abraham” in this sense.  Abram's age when he entered the land in 2083 A.M. was seventy-five (Genesis 12:4).  Isaac was born twenty-five years later, in his one-hundredth  year.  But that leaves us five years short of the thirty years' difference between the two periods in question.
 
The solution to this problem is that the period is actually reckoned from the date of the feast held when Isaac was weaned, rather than from his birthday.  That is because it was at this time that Ishmael was cast out, signifying that Ishmael and his seed was to have no part with the children of promise.  The inheritance was not to be shared.  Isaac was then officially recognized as the sole heir, and the appointed seed through whom the promises would come to fulfillment.  This was a major development, and accordingly, a detailed account is given:
 
8 And the child grew, and was weaned: and Abraham made a great feast the same day that Isaac was weaned.  9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.  10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.  11 And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight because of his son.  12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.  13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed. (Genesis 21:8-13)
 
The date of this feast is not given in the Bible, but it must have been held when Isaac was five years old.  That is not as strange as it may seem, for according to Edersheim, the Hebrews generally weaned their sons at three years or so during later biblical times.  Allowing for the longer ages of the patriarchs, and assuming a corresponding slower maturation (Isaac wasn't married until he was forty), it makes perfect sense.  These five years, added to the twenty-five years that Abram was in the land before Isaac was born, make up the thirty
years' difference we are seeking.
 
It should be remembered that the four hundred and thirty years definitely began when God first made the promises to Abram in his seventy-fifth year – the year he entered the promised land.  This has been established by Galatians 3:17ff.  It is also beyond dispute that Isaac was born twenty-five years later, when Abraham was one hundred.  Therefore the four hundred years must be reckoned from Isaac's fifth year.  This feast is the only event recorded in Scripture near that date; and therefore the only possible explanation for that fact: moreover, it is a relevant and credible one.


 
How Long was Israel in Egypt?
 
There are a few more matters to clear up.  The reader may have noticed that my citation of Genesis 15:13 above is punctuated differently from the reading in the Authorized Version, which has:
 
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;
 
But John Gill (known as a master Hebraist) punctuates it like this:
 
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;
 
The A.V.'s rendering obscures the central point of the prophecy; which is that there would be a very long wait before the seed of Abraham would actually inherit the land.  It was given to sustain the faith of the seed of Abraham during the centuries that passed while they lived as strangers in the lands of others.  Many generations of Hebrews would live and die before the promised day would come.  This was a severe test of faith; and required the support of a definitely defined period of time.  It was necessary to the purpose that the beginning of the period be definite, so that the time of fulfillment could be accurately known, anticipated, and recognized when it came as a fulfillment of the promise.  It was also necessary that Israel should be prepared for the deep humiliation and oppression that they would suffer before their triumphant Exodus from the land of their slave-masters; but this is not the primary idea.
 
I have accordingly adopted John Gill's punctuation from his commentary, for the fact is, that they did not serve, nor were they afflicted for four hundred years, as the A.V.'s reading says.  For, to begin with, the length of time Israel spent in Egypt was just two hundred and fifteen years, all told.  Of the four hundred years, one hundred and eighty-five were spent in Canaan.   Jacob and his sons went down to Egypt in 2298 A.M.  Isaac's weaning-feast was in 2113.  2298 – 2113 = 185.
 
There were also just two hundred and fifteen years from Abram's entry into Canaan to the entry of Jacob into Egypt.  Is it not interesting that the four hundred and thirty years of Israel's sojourning is divided into two equal parts at this point?
 


Jochebed and Amram
 
The idea that Israel was in Egypt for four hundred and thirty years leads to many wrong conclusions; such as the idea that Jochebed was not literally Levi's daughter, but a distant descendant of Levi, because she could not have lived to have children 300 years later.  This is directly contradicted by Numbers 26:59.
 
59 And the name of Amram's wife was Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, whom her mother bare to Levi in Egypt: and she bare unto Amram Aaron and Moses, and Miriam their sister.
 
Kohath and his two brothers were born in Canaan, not Egypt.  They came down to Egypt with their father (Genesis 46:8-11).  Jochebed was born after Levi entered Egypt in 2298; and was therefore younger than they, but we do not know by how much.  But we do know that Levi died in 2392, forty-one years before the birth of Moses.  So she may have been as young as forty-one when she gave birth to Moses in 2433.  It is entirely possible that she was as young as, or even younger than Amram, her nephew.
 
The same problem arises with the elongated chronology with respect to Moses' father.  A second Amram must be invented also, because Amram the son of Kohath could not possibly have lived long enough to father Moses eighty years before the Exodus.  Can you find two different Amrams in this genealogy?
 
16 And these are the names of the sons of Levi according to their generations; Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari: and the years of the life of Levi were an hundred thirty and seven years.
17 The sons of Gershon; Libni, and Shimi, according to their families.
18 And the sons of Kohath; Amram, and Izhar, and Hebron, and Uzziel: and the years of the life of Kohath were an hundred thirty and three years.
19 And the sons of Merari; Mahali and Mushi: these are the families of Levi according to their generations.
20 And Amram took him Jochebed his father's sister to wife; and she bare him Aaron and Moses: and the years of the life of Amram were an hundred and thirty and seven years. (Exodus 6:16-20)
 
The structure of this genealogy is sublimely simple and logical.  The members of each successive generation are listed in order: first, the members of Levi's second generation in verse 16, then the third generation in verses 17-19, the fourth in verses 20-22, and finally some members of the fifth in verses 23-25.  Each succeeding generation is linked to the previous one by the names of all the fathers.  There is therefore no possibility of confusion; nor can there be any generations left out.  Yes, some persons are omitted; for example, the sons of Hebron are not given, and the fifth generation list is selective, but this is not intended to be exhaustive – but only a list of “the heads of the fathers of the Levites”(6:25).
 
So how can anyone say that the Amram of verse 20 is not the same Amram introduced in verse 18?  We correctly assume that the Merari of verse 16 is the same with the Merari in verse 19, and the Izhar of verse 18 is the same as the Izhar in verse 21.  To deny this simple principle would violate the structure of the record and introduce complete confusion.

This should remove any doubt that it is Amram the son of Kohath who fathers Aaron and Moses in verse 20.  And yet there is more proof: 
 
57 And these are they that were numbered of the Levites after their families: of Gershon, the family of the Gershonites: of Kohath, the family of the Kohathites: of Merari, the family of the Merarites.  58 These are the families of the Levites: the family of the Libnites, the family of the Hebronites, the family of the Mahlites, the family of the Mushites, the family of the Korathites. And Kohath begat Amram.  59 And the name of Amram's wife was Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, whom her mother bare to Levi in Egypt: and she bare unto Amram Aaron and Moses, and Miriam their sister. (Numbers 26:57-59)
 
Kohath, it says, begat Amram.  And in the very next verse, Amram is identified as the husband of Jochebed.  Will they now say that begat does not necessarily mean begat?    Or that there were two Kohaths?
 
The only reason that Moses' parents are thus removed by some from their proper place in the genealogies is because of the myth of a four hundred and thirty year sojourn in Egypt.


 
How Long was Israel's Enslavement?
 
The circumstances of Israel's enslavement were as follows:
 
6 And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.  7 And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them. 
8 Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. 
9 And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: 10 Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land.  11 Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens.  And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses. (Exodus 1:6-11)
 
Israel was not enslaved until after Joseph and all his generation had died (Exodus 1:6), and after the last Pharaoh who knew Joseph had also died (Exodus 1:8).  Joseph died at the age of one hundred and ten, in the year 2369 A.M., but we know that Levi didn't die until @2392, ninety-four years after Jacob entered Egypt4 .  So the years of slavery could not have been more than one hundred and twenty-one years (215 – 94 = 121); and they may have been less.
 
In fact, they were not enslaved until “...the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them“(Exodus 1:7)5 and they had become “more and mightier than [the Egyptians]”, as the “new Pharaoh” put it (Exodus 1:9).  This suggests that Israel was not in bondage until late in its stay in Egypt.  Remember Stephen's words:
“17 But when the time of the promise drew nigh, which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt, 18 Till another king arose, which knew not Joseph.  19 The same dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil entreated our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, to the end they might not live.  20 In which time Moses was born...” (Acts 7:17-20)
 
However, it is clear that the oppression lasted more than eighty years, for Moses was eighty years old at the time of the Exodus (Exodus 7:7); and he was born after the massacre of the male children began.  The enslavement, therefore, must have begun before the birth of Moses.  On the other hand, Aaron, his older brother, who was three years older (Exodus 7:7), must have been born just before the massacre of the male children began. 
Concluding Remarks
 
At the outset, I observed that the statement in Exodus 12:41 “appears to be a notice of the fulfillment of prophecy.  The phrase 'even the selfsame day it came to pass' seems to mark a particular and remarkable fulfillment...  But there is no prophecy of a four hundred and thirty years' sojourning of the children of Israel anywhere in the Old Testament.  There is only the prediction of a four hundred years sojourning, in Genesis 15:13.” 
 
Clearly, Moses was recording the fulfillment of that prophecy at the Exodus.  But it would not make sense to speak of four hundred and thirty years unless those for whom he wrote understood that the four hundred years of the original prediction began at a time thirty years subsequent to Abram's entering of Canaan, when “the sojourning of Israel”, of which he speaks, began.  Otherwise, in order to draw attention to the fulfillment of the prophecy, he would have had to say:
 
Now the sojourning of the seed of Abraham, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred years.  And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred  years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.
 
And if the original prediction of just four hundred years was, as some say, a round number for the same period of four hundred and thirty, then Moses would have looked pretty silly claiming that the prediction was fulfilled to the day, when it was off by thirty years!  This is my final argument for the distinction between the two periods, and for my identification of their respective starting points and durations.
 
Thus we see, in this brief study – instead of discrepancies, contradictions and inaccuracies – yet another example of how precise the biblical history is, and how perfectly the chronological statements of holy Scripture fit together into a coherent, systematic whole.




Footnotes
 
1 The average length of a generation during this era actually turns out to be close to sixty-five years.  From the birth of Isaac in 2108 to the birth of Moses in 2433 was three hundred and twenty-five years.  This represents five generations: Isaac, Jacob, Levi, Kohath, Amram.  325 / 5 = 65.
 
2 There is no warrant in the Hebrew text for inserting the word “had”.  The AV translators seem to have assumed that the call referred to here is the original call of Abram to leave Mesopotamia, referred to by Stephen in Acts 7:2-3; but this is a second call, given in Haran, as the context shows.  Terah had settled there, perhaps because of an illness that eventuated in his death.  God renewed the original call at that time, which was simply a command, ”Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee”; but adding promises to it (see Genesis 12:1-3).
 
3 The designation of years from the creation of the world as “Anno Mundi” or “A.M.” is from the Seder Olam Rabah, the official Jewish chronology; and was also used by James Ussher.  It is the most natural and biblical way of referring to events in biblical history, being less confusing and cumbersome than the use of B.C. dates, which count backwards, and from a date not given in Scripture.  I use it in all my chronological studies.
 
4 Jacob married Leah and Rachel in the year 2252 A.M.  Levi was his third son.  None of them were twins or triplets, for Leah conceived each of them separately (Genesis 29:32-34).  So Levi could not have been born before 2254.  He lived one hundred and thirty-seven years (Exodus 6:16).  Levi is the only son of Jacob whose lifespan is given in Scripture.  There is a tradition that Benjamin was born twenty-three years after Jacob's marriage, which would make him about fifteen years younger than Joseph, the next youngest.  Others of Jacob's sons may have lived longer than Levi.
 
5 From the time that Jacob was 84, when he was married, to the time when he and his family moved to Egypt at age 130, the males in his family had increased from one to 58.  Jacob had eleven of his twelve sons in just seven years.  215 years later, at the Exodus, there were about 600,000 men in the family.   The average number of male sons for each Israelite male, over the last three generations, had to be about 22 in order to achieve this astounding growth.  For  58 X 22 X 22 X 22 = 617,584.  But the growth rate was not constant; for Exodus 1:7 says that the growth, already great, was further accelerated after the death of Joseph, and 1:12 definitely states, “But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew.”








Appendix A:
Back to Canaan
 
 
We have seen that the prophecy we have been studying was most exactly fulfilled.  But we have not yet considered all its details.  There is more:
 
13 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; 14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance. 15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.  16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full. (Genesis 15:13-16)
 
The four hundred years' sojourn was to terminate in the judgment of Egypt and the Exodus of Israel from that land; but the time of the return of Israel to the land of Canaan was not so definitely foretold.  It was only stated that “ in the fourth generation they shall come hither again”.   We have already seen that Moses' generation was the fourth from the entrance of Israel into Egypt.  This is the generation that should have inherited the land; but sadly, Joshua and Caleb were the only representatives of that generation who did so.  However, that generation did “come hither [back to Canaan] again”.  They returned to the very border of Canaan, but they did not enter in, because of unbelief.  The conquest would have to wait for the rise of the fifth generation.
 
40 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. 41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt. (Exodus 12:40-41)
 
The “sojourning”, the predicted period in Israel's existence when they were strangers in lands belonging to others was ended at the Exodus, but Israel would not actually “possess” the land of Canaan until forty-six years later.  Nevertheless, during the first year after the Exodus, Israel was constituted a nation under God.  It received a complete system of laws: both criminal, religious and administrative.  A center of worship was set up – the tabernacle – which was also the seat of judgment.  Israel was now united – not only by its familial bonds, but – by a common government and by a common form of worship.  They were no longer sojourners: they were now a nation in their own right.
 
Early in the second year, Israel, having been organized into a nation, was summoned to take possession of the promised land.  Moses recalled this event just before he handed over the leadership to Joshua and left this earthly scene:
 
6 The LORD our God spake unto us in Horeb, saying, Ye have dwelt long enough in this mount: 7 Turn you, and take your journey, and go to the mount of the Amorites, and unto all the places nigh thereunto, in the plain, in the hills, and in the vale, and in the south, and by the sea side, to the land of the Canaanites, and unto Lebanon, unto the great river, the river Euphrates.  8 Behold, I have set the land before you: go in and possess the land which the LORD sware unto your fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give unto them and to their seed after them. (Deuteronomy 1:6-8)
 
Then spies were sent out, which reported the goodness of the land; but Israel believed not, and God turned them back into the wilderness instead, to be chastised for their refusal to trust Him.  All but a few of the fourth generation would have to die there.  The Amorites would thus gain a brief reprieve, a further space for repentance; in which they might reflect upon the meaning of the tidings out of Egypt, before their inevitable judgment fell.
 
It is clear, then, that it was God's intention for Israel to immediately begin the conquest as soon as they had been organized into a nation at Mount Horeb.  The delay in fulfillment of the promise was owing solely to Israel's rebellion.





 
Appendix B:
Keil & Delitzsch to the Contrary
 
 
“Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.  And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.” (Exodus 12:40-41)
 
I have delayed the discussion of objections to the view I have set forth to keep the presentation as simple as possible.  But this paper would be incomplete without a word from critics of my view.  Keil & Delitzsch, whose commentaries I use almost daily, strongly oppose the view that I have set forth in this paper.  Their suite of arguments in rebuttal of my position is complete, their scholarship impeccable.  They attack from many angles.  For all that, I am confident that my readers can discern the lack of substance in their attack, which I shall quote in full, with my comments interspersed.   At the end, you will find a two-column table that exhibits the main differences between the two views.
 
Their commentary on Exodus 12:40-41 begins as follows:
 
“The sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt had lasted 430 years.”
 
But the text does not say so.  If Moses had meant to say so, he could have
omitted two words that appear in the text in both English and Hebrew.  Those words are, “who dwelt”.  No one has been able to explain why they are there, if Moses meant to say that Israel was in Egypt 430 years.
 
Moreover, it cannot be proved that these two words have no effect on the meaning of the statement; nor can it be shown that my interpretation of them is not grammatically possible.  All that the esteemed authors can honestly say for certain is that they think it means something else.
 
“This number is not critically doubtful, nor are the 430 years to be reduced to 215 by an arbitrary interpolation, such as we find in the LXX, ἡ δὲ κατοίκησις τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ ἥν κατῷκησαν (Cod. Alex. αὐτοὶ καὶ οί πατέρες αὐτῶν) ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτῳ καὶ ἐν γῇ Χαναάν, [Translated 'and of their fathers, in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan.' HDK]”
 
No one “reduces the 430 years to 215”; we merely say that one half of this time was spent in Egypt, and the other in Canaan.  And no one bases his view on this statement of the Septuagint.  It simply provides corroborative evidence that the Alexandrian Jews also understood that the four hundred and thirty years includes the sojourning of Abraham and the patriarchs in Canaan.
 
“This chronological statement, the genuineness of which is placed beyond all doubt by Onkelos, the Syriac, Vulgate, and other versions...”
 
Again, no one disputes its genuineness.  The point at issue is what period it refers to.
 
“...is not only in harmony with the prediction in Gen_15:13, where the round number 400 is employed in prophetic style...”
 
Notice that no proof is given that four hundred is a “round number”.  There is not only no proof that can be given: but in fact it is impossible that God would leave the Israelites a promise of deliverance from an intolerable slavery after four hundred years when He really knew that it would be another thirty years before they would be freed!
 
“... but may be reconciled with the different genealogical lists, if we only bear in mind that the genealogies do not always contain a complete enumeration of all the separate links, but very frequently intermediate links of little historical importance are omitted, as we have already seen in the genealogy of Moses and Aaron (Exodus 6:18-20).”
 
This is faulty logic: “An omission sometimes occurs, therefore we may assume that it has occurred here, even though there is no proof that it has.”  One way that we can know that a gap exists is by comparing one text with another parallel text where the missing material is supplied.  Where is the parallel genealogical text that shows more descendants in Moses' genealogy than the one in Genesis 6?  There is none: it would have been cited if there were. 
 
The only other case that would prove that one or more gaps exist is if the time period were too long to possibly span with just the persons listed.  An example occurs in Ruth 4:20-22, where the span of years from Nahshon to David is about five hundred and ten years, and only four intervening links are given.  That is simply not the case here.

The authors' commentary on Exodus 6:18 theorizes, but does not prove, that there are gaps in Moses' genealogy.  It theorizes that there were two Amrams, and that Moses was the son of the younger Amram – perhaps the great-great-great-great (etc.) grandson of the original.  I have already discussed this, but it may be instructive to address it again here.
 
“But the Amram mentioned in Exodus 6:20 as the father of Moses, cannot be the same person as the Amram who was the son of Kohath (Exodus 6:18), but must be a later descendant.  For, however the sameness of names may seem to favour the identity of the persons, if we simply look at the genealogy before us, a comparison of this passage with Numbers 3:27-28 will show the impossibility of such an assumption.”
 
Then they quote Tiele to explain why it is impossible for the Amram in verse 20, who married Jochebed, who bore Moses, to be the same Amram who in verse 18 is given as the son of Kohath through whom Moses was descended:
 
“According to Numbers 3:27-28, the Kohathites were divided (in Moses' time) into the four branches, Amramites, Izharites, Hebronites, and Uzzielites, who consisted together of 8600 men and boys (women and girls not being included).  Of these, about a fourth, or 2150 men, would belong to the Amramites.”
 
This is wholly gratuitous; but it is typical of the way many chronologists argue.  Assumptions, estimates, theories are set against the plain statements of chronological facts.  No one knows how many there were of each clan, period.
 
“Consequently, if Amram the son of Kohath, and tribe-father of the Amramites, was the same person as Amram the father of Moses, Moses must have had 2147 brothers and brothers' sons (the brothers' daughters, the sisters, and their daughters, not being reckoned at all).  But as this is absolutely impossible, it must be granted that Amram the son of Kohath was not the father of Moses, and that an indefinitely long list of generations has been omitted between the former and his descendant of the same name' (Tiele, Chr. des A. T. p. 36).”
 
Obviously, the argument is inconclusive.  Amram may have had as many as thirty or forty or even more male offspring, for all we know.  When Jacob went down to Egypt , the males in his family numbered fifty-eight.  Two hundred and fifteen years later, at the Exodus, there were about six hundred thousand men in the family.  As I reckon it, the average number of male sons for each Israelite male, over the last three generations, had to be about twenty-two in order to achieve this astounding growth.  For  58 X 22 X 22 X 22 = 617,584. 
 
But the growth rate was not constant; for Exodus 1:7 says that their rate of growth, already great, was further accelerated after the death of Joseph “And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them.”  God does not exaggerate: this was no ordinary fertility!  And 1:12 definitely states, “But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew.”  Amram therefore lived at the time when Israel was most prolific.
 
Keil & Delitzsch then suggest that the reason that the genealogy of Moses lists only four generations is to make the record artificially seem to conform to the prophecy in Genesis 15:16 that Israel would return to Canaan in the fourth generation! 
 
“The enumeration of only four generations, viz., Levi, Kohath, Amram, Moses, is unmistakeably related to Genesis 15:16, where it is stated that the fourth generation would return to Canaan.”
 
It seems that they would rather believe that the prophecy was not literally fulfilled (i.e. was false) than admit that only four generations existed from Levi to Moses.
 
“For example, the fact that there were more than the four generations mentioned in Exodus 6:16ff. between Levi and Moses, is placed beyond all doubt, not only by what has been adduced at Exodus 6:18-20, but by a comparison with other genealogies also.  Thus, in Numbers 26:29, Exodus 27:1; Joshua 17:3, we find six generations from Joseph to Zelophehad; in Ruth 4:18, 1Chronicles 2:5-6, there are also six from Judah to Nahshon, the tribe prince in the time of Moses; in 1Chronicles 2:18 there are seven from Judah to Bezaleel, the builder of the tabernacle; and in 1Chronicles 7:20, nine or ten are given from Joseph to Joshua.  This last genealogy shows most clearly the impossibility of the view founded upon the Alexandrian version, that the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt lasted only 215 years; for ten generations, reckoned at 40 years each, harmonize very well with 430 years, but certainly not with 215.”[Italics mine, H.D.K.]
 
There is impressive biblical scholarship in this paragraph.  I will begin with the last, since they claim it proves their case beyond doubt.  But it is unfortunate for them that the authors have cited the case of Joseph and of the Ephraimites; for on careful examination it will be seen to tell against them.  For along with the birthright which passed from Reuben to Joseph, there was a Divine blessing of extraordinary fruitfulness on the tribe of Joseph (Genesis 49:22-26) which was chiefly manifested in Ephraim's line (Genesis 48:17-19).  Joseph means “God shall add” and Ephraim means “double fruit”.  Moses (Deuteronomy 33:13-17) also predicted extraordinary fruitfulness for the tribe of Joseph.
 
There are three ways to increase the growth rate of a population: involve more females (as Jacob did), increase the incidence of multiple births, or start the childbearing years sooner.  Probably all three of these contributed to Israel's astounding growth while in Egypt.  But in Ephraim, we see clear evidence of the last method.  For in Genesis 50:22-23, we read:
 
And Joseph dwelt in Egypt, he, and his father's house: and Joseph lived an hundred and ten years. And Joseph saw Ephraim's children of the third generation: the children also of Machir the son of Manasseh were brought up upon Joseph's knees. (Genesis 50:22-23)
 
According to Keil and Delitzsch themselves, this means that Joseph lived to see his great-great-grandchildren!  Now, all this happened after Joseph was released from prison, at age thirty.  Ephraim and Manasseh were both born in the latter part of the years of plenty (Genesis 41:46-53), so around his thirty-seventh year.  In just the seventy-three  years that remained to him, four generations grew up and had children: Ephraim, his sons, his grandsons, and
his great grandsons.  These “generations” – the ages of the fathers when they had their first sons – averaged eighteen and one quarter years – not forty years, as our opponents suppose.  At this rate, the ten generations from Joseph to Joshua that Keil and Delitzsch refer to above would represent one hundred and eighty years.  As I have proved, Israel was in Egypt two hundred and fifteen years; and Joshua was grown when the Exodus occurred.  A plausible scenario can be constructed from these facts as follows:
 
Joseph had Ephraim and Manasseh before the years of famine, but after he was freed from prison (2289 A.M.) and after he had been collecting grain for some time.  Joseph's brothers came down to Egypt in the second year of the famine (2298).  So his sons were still quite young, between three and seven years old.   Taking the mean of five years, and counting 18 years as a generation, we then –
 
Add 13 years to the birth of Zabad.  (18 – 5 = 13)
Add 18 years to the birth of Shuthelah, Ezer, and Elead.
Add 18 years to their deaths (slain by the men of Gath, 1 Chronicles 7:21).
Add 1 year to the birth of Beriah. (Joshua's line begins here.)
Add 18 years to the birth of Rephah.
Add 18 years to the birth of Telah.
Add 18 years to the birth of Tahan.
Add 18 years to the birth of Laadan.
Add 18 years to the birth of Ammihud.
Add 18 years to the birth of Elishama.
Add 18 years to the birth of Non.
Add 18 years to the birth of Jehoshua.
Add 21 years to the Exodus, in 2513 A.M., Joshua now full grown.
                              -------
                               215 years total
 
There is nothing impossible in this.  However, it does reflect the extraordinary blessing of God alluded to above.  It was not equaled by any other tribe of Israel. 
 
Four generations would seem to have been the general rule, from the words of the promise.  Or else the preeminence of Moses and Aaron, of Levi's fourth generation, accounts for the number of generations being reckoned as four for the whole nation. 
 
It is also possible that the word, “generation” in the prophecy of Genesis 15 was used to denote the period of time of a typical or average generation.  In Abram's day, it was certainly less than a hundred years, but probably more than forty.   It so happens that the average of the generations of Isaac, Jacob, and those of Levi during the Egyptian sojourn was sixty-five years.  It may be that sixty years was reckoned as a normal generation.
 
And what if there were six, ten, or even twelve generations in some genealogical lines?  Such things are highly variable in any population.  Some people start having children in their late teens.  Others may not marry until middle age.  The length of a generation is never defined in Scripture.  But chronology – real chronology versus imaginary chronology – does not depend on such variables.  It depends on the chronological statements of the Hebrew
text, and necessary inferences therefrom.
 
Going back to the original assertion, “the fact that there were more than the four generations mentioned in Exodus 6:16ff. between Levi and Moses, is placed beyond all doubt... by a comparison with other genealogies also”, the simple answer is – the fact that there were more generations than four in some of the other tribes does not prove that there were more than four in the tribe of Levi.
 
Besides, we have a definite and authoritative statement of the Apostle Paul to the effect that the law was given four hundred and thirty years after the covenant promise was given to Abraham:
 
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. (Galatians 3:16-17)
 
Aware that this one text sweeps away all their sophisticated arguments, the authors have had to find a way to discredit the statement.  This involves more reflections on the weaknesses of the Septuagint:
 
“(Note: The Alexandrian translators have arbitrarily altered the text to suit the genealogy of Moses in Exodus 6:16ff., just as in the genealogies of the patriarchs in Gen 5 and 11.”
 
The translators of the Septuagint indeed took unwarranted liberties with the text in Genesis 5 and 11; but that is a different matter from offering helpful explanatory material derived from actual chronological facts given elsewhere in the Bible, as they have done in Exodus 12:40.
 
“The view held by the Seventy became traditional in the synagogue, and the Apostle Paul followed it in Galatians 3:17, where he reckoned the interval between the promise to Abraham and the giving of the law as 430 years, the question of chronological exactness having no bearing upon his subject at the time.)”
 
It cannot be proved that Paul was just following the traditional view, or that he was unconcerned about the accuracy of the number.  Why should we not assume that he knew the facts and meant what he said?  If there was no need to be exact, why did Paul not use the “round number” of four hundred years?  In Galatians, we find Paul locked in mortal combat with Judaizing Jews.  To make an inaccurate statement regarding Jewish history was to invite attacks on one's credibility.
 
But Paul's statement, taken literally, is perfectly harmonious with the view that I am defending.  There were precisely four hundred and thirty years – to the day – from the first announcement of the gospel to Abraham to the Exodus; and the Law was given later in that same year.
 
But Keil and Delitzsch are not done.  They are at least determined to be consistent.  Even the plain expression, “the self-same day” must be explained away because of their “round number” theory of the four hundred years.  It makes no sense to say that the prophecy was fulfilled to the day if it was thirty years off!
 
“The statement in Exodus 12:41, “the self-same day,” is not to be understood as relating to the first day after the lapse of the 430 years, as though the writer supposed that it was on the 14th Abib that Jacob entered Egypt 430 years before; but points back to the day of the exodus, mentioned in Exodus 12:14, as compared with Exodus 12:11., i.e., the 15th Abib (cf. Exodus 12:51 and Exodus 13:4).”[Italics mine, H.D.K.]
 
I think Keil and Delitzsch interpret Moses to mean that the entire Exodus occurred on the same day as the first Passover.  But why may not the phrase mean what every reader of the text has naturally understood it to mean?  No reason is given for the authors' preference for their interpretation of the phrase.  If we are right, it is highly significant; and if they are right, it could well have been left out.  But consider the phrase in its immediate context:
 
40 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.  41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt. (Exodus 12:40-41)
 
Verse 40 tells us how long “the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt” was – “four hundred and thirty years”.  This calls attention to the promise of Genesis 15:13, with its “four hundred years”, but which commenced its count thirty years after it was given, since the birth of Isaac twenty-five years later, and his recognition as the appointed seed was in his fifth year.
 
Verse 41 tells us when “the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.”  It was “at the end of the [same period of] four hundred and thirty years”.  This repetition is for emphasis. 
 
“And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years...  that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.”
 
To add further emphasis, and to call attention to the exactness of the fulfillment, the clause “even the selfsame day it came to pass” is inserted. 
 
41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.
 
The syntax requires that both occurrences of the phrase, “it came to pass” refer to the same day – the day at “the end of the four hundred and thirty years”, on which “all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.”  How then can anyone say that “the selfsame day” has nothing to do with “the end of the four hundred and thirty years”?  The sense is plain and obvious: no other interpretation is possible.
 
I have presented the entirety of Keil and Delitzsch's case.  I have not distorted it, misrepresented it, or selectively quoted from it.  I have given, I believe, a fair and equitable evaluation of the argumentation employed against my view; and I submit that it fails at every point. 
 
 




The Long Chronology
 
 
1 The sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt lasted 430 years.
 
2 The Septuagint is wrong when it makes Exodus 12:40 to read “Now the sojourning of the children of Israel and of their fathers, in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, was four hundred and thirty years.”
 
3 The “four hundred” in Genesis 15:13 is a round number for “four hundred and thirty”.
 
4 The genealogy of Moses and Aaron in Exodus 6 omits several unspecified generations.
 
5 Jochebed, the Mother of Moses, was not the literal daughter of Levi, but a later descendant of his.
 
6 The Amram mentioned in Exodus 6:20 as the father of Moses, cannot be the same person as the Amram who was the son of Kohath (Exodus 6:18), but must be a later descendant.
 
7 The enumeration of only four generations, viz., Levi, Kohath, Amram, Moses, is artificially adapted to fit the prophecy in Genesis 15:16, where it is stated that the fourth generation would return to Canaan.
 
8 The fact that other tribes went through more generations than four shows that Levi must have done the same.
 
9 When Paul used the number 430 in Galatians 3:16-17, he was not concerned about the accuracy of the number, since it had no bearing on his subject; but was only using the currently-accepted chronology, based on the Septuagint, which was in error.
 
10 In the statement in Exodus 12:41, “the self-same day,” does not mean that the 430 years was exact, that is, that it began and ended on the same day of the year; but that the whole body of the Israelites left Egypt on the same day – the day of the first Passover.  The prophecy was not accurate to the decade, let alone to the day.




The Short Chronology
 
1 The sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt lasted only 215 years.  The 430 years runs from the time that Abram entered the promised land to the Exodus, in the same year as the giving of the Law. (Gal 3:16-17)
 
2 The Septuagint translation is not wrong, but only expands the text with a helpful explanatory interpolation.
 
3 The “four hundred” in Genesis 15:13 is the exact number of years that the seed of Abram lived as sojourners, from the weaning of Isaac to the Exodus; the thirty years' difference being the time Abraham was in Canaan before Isaac was established as his sole heir.
 
4 The genealogy of Moses and Aaron in Exodus 6 is complete, as the structure of it proves.
 
5 Jochebed, the Mother of Moses, was the literal daughter of Levi, “whom her mother bare to Levi in Egypt.”(Num. 26:59)
 
6 There is only one Amram, the immediate and proper son of Kohath, in the genealogies: the second is invented. (Numbers 26:58-59)
 
7 The prophecy was literally fulfilled when Israel came out of Egypt under the leadership of Moses and Aaron, Levites, in the fourth generation of their tribe since Israel entered Egypt.
 
8  The fact that other tribes went through more generations than four shows nothing of the kind.  There was variation among the tribes.
 
9 Paul, besides writing under inspiration, knew what the facts were and said what he meant.
 
10 The text is unambiguous.  “And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.”  The prophecy was accurate to the day.







Old Testament Chronology
 from
Abram to Joshua
(2008 to 2559 Anno Mundi)
 
2008. Abram was born.
2083. Abram left Haran and entered Canaan in his 75th year.  The 430 years'      of Israel's sojourning began.
2093. Abram married Hagar in his 85th year.
2094. Ishmael was born in Abram's 86th year.
2107. Sarah's conception and the birth of Isaac was foretold.
          Abram, 99 years old, received the covenant of circumcision. 
          Abram's name was changed to Abraham, Sarai's to Sarah.
          Sodom was destroyed, Lot saved. 
          Abraham went to Gerar and returned.
          Sarah conceived.
2108. Isaac, the promised seed, was born in Abraham's 100th year.
2113. Isaac was weaned at age five, Ishmael cast out.  The 400 years' sojourning           of Abram's seed began.
2145. Sarah died, aged 127.  Abraham was 137.
2148. Isaac married Rebekah in his 40th year.
2168. Esau and Jacob were born in Isaac's 60th year.
2183. Abraham died, aged 175
2208. Esau married at the age of 40.
2245.          Jacob left home at the age of 77.
2252. Jacob, at the age of 84, married both Leah and Rachel.
2259. Joseph was born in Jacob's 91st year.
2265. Jacob returned to Canaan, aged 97.  Joseph was 6. 
2276. Joseph told his dreams to his brothers at the age of 17.
2288. Isaac died, aged 180.
2289. Joseph stood before Pharaoh, aged 30, and interpreted his dreams.
2296. At the end of 7 years' plenty, Joseph was 37.
2298. At the end of 2 years' famine, when Jacob came down into Egypt,
          Joseph was 39 and Jacob was 130.
2315. Jacob died, aged 147.  Joseph was 56.
2369. Joseph died, aged 110.
2391. Earliest possible date for Levi's death, aged 137.
2433. Moses was born 80 years before the Exodus.
2473. Moses fled Egypt at age 40, went to Midian.
2474. Caleb was born.
2513. Moses returned to Egypt, now 80 years old. 
          Egypt was destroyed by the ten plagues. 
          Israel departed from Egypt at the end of the 400/430 years of Israel's
          sojourning. 
          The law was given at Mount Sinai.
          The Tabernacle was built.
          Aaron was consecrated and Mosaic worship instituted.
2514. Moses sent out the spies. 
          Israel's 4th generation refused to enter Canaan.
          The wilderness wanderings began.
2552. The 5th generation was prepared to enter Canaan by the conquest of Og    and Sihon.
2553. Israel crossed the Jordan and entered Canaan.  The conquest began with           Jericho.
2559. The war of conquest ended, Joshua divided the land. 
          Israel possessed the land of Canaan, as God had promised.
 
 
 
Howard Douglas King
November 25, 2014
Revised August 9, 2015
 
 
 


 

16 And Isaiah said unto Hezekiah, Hear the word of the LORD.  17 Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store unto this day, shall be carried into Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith the LORD.  18 And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.
 
19 Then said Hezekiah unto Isaiah, Good is the word of the LORD which thou hast spoken. And he said, Is it not good, if peace and truth be in my days? (2 Kings 20:16-19) 

 
It has always seemed strange to me that some find fault with Hezekiah for these words.  I have heard it said that Hezekiah showed a callous selfishness in so saying.  The implication is that he was unconcerned that the judgment of God was to fall on others, if only he would be spared.  But Christian charity requires us to think well of other saints – even if they are dead – and to put a charitable construction on their words and deeds, as much as possible.  There is no necessity in these words for thinking the worst of the good king.  It is better to understand them as words of submission to God's rebuke of him.  He accepts the bad news, does not quarrel about it, and looks for the mercy that is in it.  Would we be able to take it as well, I wonder?
 
Matthew Henry reads it this way:
 
Hezekiah's humble and patient submission to this sentence (2 Kings 20:19).  Observe how he argues himself into this submission:
 
1. He lays it down for a truth that “good is the word of the Lord, even this word, though a threatening; for every word of his is so.  It is not only just, but good; for, as he does no wrong to any, so he means no hurt to good men.  It is good; for he will bring good out of it, and do me good by the foresight of it.”   We should believe this concerning every providence, that it is good, is working for good.
2. He takes notice of that in this word which was good, that he should not live to see this evil, much less to share in it.  He makes the best of the bad: “Is it not good?  Yes, certainly it is, and better than I deserve.”  Note:
(1.) True penitents, when they are under divine rebukes, call them not only just, but good; not only submit to the punishment of their iniquity, but accept of it.  So Hezekiah did, and by this it appeared that he was indeed humbled for the pride of his heart.   
(2.) When at any time we are under dark dispensations, or have dark prospects, public or personal, we must take notice of what is for us as well as what is against us, that we may by thanksgiving honour God, and may in our patience possess our own souls.
(3.) As to public affairs, it is good, and we are bound to think it so, if peace and truth be in our days. That is,
 
[1.] Whatever else we want, it is good if we have peace and truth, if we have the true religion professed and protected, Bibles and ministers, and enjoy these in peace, not terrified with the alarms of war or persecution.
[2.] Whatever trouble may come when we are gone, it is good if all be well in our days.  Not that we should be unconcerned for posterity; it is a grief to foresee evils: but we should own that the deferring of judgments is a great favour in general, and to have them deferred so long as what we may die in peace is a particular favour to us, for charity begins at home.  We know not how we shall bear the trial, and therefore have reason to think it well if we may but get safely to heaven before it comes.
 
There are many places in Scripture which show that God intentionally delayed judgment until one of his servants had died, to spare him the pain.  Isaiah says:
 
The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come.  He shall enter into peace... (Isaiah 57:1-2)
 
This is no small mercy, and it is proper that it be acknowledged as such.  Here is an example from the account of Josiah's response upon the discovery of a book of the law of the Lord:
 
And as for the king of Judah, who sent you to enquire of the LORD, so shall ye say unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel concerning the words which thou hast heard; Because thine heart was tender, and thou didst humble thyself before God, when thou heardest his words against this place, and against the inhabitants thereof, and humbledst thyself before me, and didst rend thy clothes, and weep before me; I have even heard thee also, saith the LORD.   Behold, I will gather thee to thy fathers, and thou shalt be gathered to thy grave in peace, neither shall thine eyes see all the evil that I will bring upon this place, and upon the inhabitants of the same. So they brought the king word again. (2 Chronicles 34:26-28)
 
God assures Josiah through the prophetess that He has heard his prayer for mercy, and granted it, as far as Josiah himself was concerned.  What if Josiah had said the same thing as Hezekiah?  Would he then be accused of selfishness?


 
Howard Douglas King
September 26, 2015

Hugh Ross's Faulty Proof-Texting
             for the
Expanding Universe Theory

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.  And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.  And God called the firmament Heaven. (Genesis 1:6-8a)

It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.” (Isaiah 40:22)

Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein... (Isaiah 42:5)

Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself... (Isaiah 44:24)  

 


Hugh Ross and others have very few exegetical arguments to make their version of the “Big Bang” theory, the so-called “Progressive Creationism” look like it came from the Bible.  One of them recurs in his presentation: that the Bible says  that God is (even now) stretching out the universe.  Sadly, many young-earth creationists have embraced this view as well. 
 
It deserves mention that there are many alternative explanations to the phenomena of “the red-shift” of distant luminaries and of “cosmic background radiation” besides the common theory that the universe is expanding.  Many scientists, secular and Christian, are skeptical of the “expanding universe theory”, which creates more problems than it solves.  But apart from the question of whether or not the universe is indeed expanding, Ross's interpretation of these texts is a patent misrepresentation of what the Bible actually says, as an examination of the texts will clearly show. 
 
One does not need to know Hebrew to understand the arguments that follow.  One only needs to know how to use a lexicon, and how to reason soundly upon the scriptural text.  The Hebrew words that are important to our discussion have been represented using Strong's pronunciation guide, rather than a transliteration.  It seemed the best way to give the reader a “handle” on the words, so he can remember and use them.  In a live lecture, I would have simply pronounced them.
 
My first observation is that the appeal to these texts creates an insuperable problem for Ross, at least in Isaiah 44:24, cited above.  Is it not plain that his interpretation must apply to both members of the clause?  In other words, if the text is telling us that the heavens are now expanding, then it must also be telling us that the earth is expanding as well, which is patently false.  This fact alone is fatal to the Rossian interpretation.
 
My second point is that many of these texts (there are seventeen in all) that refer to the stretching out of the heavens use the past tense.  These do not help his case, for he must explain why the “stretching out” is commonly spoken of as a past event if it refers to an ongoing process.  Only a few of these seventeen texts are rendered in the present tense in our English Bible; and I will address them later on.
 
Our third observation is that this stretching out is a figure of speech – poetic imagery, not scientific data.  It is intended to set forth an appropriate image of something beyond our experience and understanding.  In Proverbs 8:27, God is said to have “set a compass upon the face of the depth”.  This is obviously not literal description.  In another place (Job 37:18) the Bible uses very different imagery to represent God's creation of the sky,  “Hast thou with him spread out (raw-kah') the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?”  Here, the sky is made of metal, formed into a bowl and polished to a mirror finish.  How different from the thin gauze curtain of Isaiah's picture!  But both representations are true as poetic descriptions of Almighty God creating the sky.
 
Fourth, the verb, naw-taw', translated “stretch” in all three of these verses has many significations; but is in the Bible commonly used of the setting up of a tent.  It is often translated “pitch”, and therefore can mean the whole process of setting up a tent.  Tents, in ancient times, were made of relatively inelastic fabrics.  One did not so much stretch a tent as simply spread it out.  A tent was unfolded and placed on a frame, which had already been set up.  Then the tent fabric was spread out, and finally secured with ropes and stakes under light tension.  The only sense in which the tent was “stretched” is that it was made taut – not expanded.  Likewise for “curtain” in this text.  This word occurs nowhere else in the Old Testament, but it could mean the fabric of a tent; for this sentence seems to be a simple parallelism.  (Parallelism is the hallmark of Hebrew poetry.) The heavens apparently are being compared first to a “curtain”, then to a tent; but the nouns may be nearly synonymous, as the verbs are.  In any case, this provides no support for an ongoing expansion of space, or of the universe; for it clearly refers to a once-for-all act of God in “pitching the tent” of the sky on the second day of creation week.
 
But Ross will tell us that we are overlooking the fact that the verbs used are in the present tense.  For example, God “stretcheth out the heavens... and spreadeth them out...”(Isaiah 40:22)  Ross admits that he is not a Hebrew scholar; and neither am I.  But in consulting the authorities, we find that here a participle is used.  There is no indication of time, or of continuous versus completed action.  Weingreen's Hebrew Grammar, discussing the active participle, states that the same Hebrew phrase can be rendered “the man keepeth”, or “the man who was keeping”, or “the man who is keeping”, depending entirely on context.   The clause could therefore be rendered, “stretching out the heavens, and spreading them out...” without any implication as to time.  But one does not stretch out a curtain endlessly, nor does the pitching of a tent take forever.  These analogies point to  action completed in the past.  Accordingly, the Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on Isaiah renders both these verbals in the past tense.  So did the translators of the Greek Old Testament.  They all understood this as a reference to God's creative work in the beginning of the world – not of something going on now.
 
Brenton's translation of 40:22 in the Septuagint reads: “It is he that comprehends the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants in it are as grasshoppers; he that set up the heaven as a chamber, and stretched it out as a tent to dwell in...”
Delitzsch renders it, “He who is enthroned above the vault of the earth, and its inhabitants resemble grasshoppers; who has spread out the heavens like gauze, and stretched them out like a tent-roof to dwell in...”  (See also Psalm 104:2.)  Note the use of the past tense in both these translations.  This does not reflect a time element in the Hebrew original, but rather, the obvious fact that this verse refers to the creation.  Delitzsch, commenting on 42:5, states the principle: “The attributive participles we have resolved into perfects, because the three first at least declare facts of creation, which have occurred once for all.”
 
Why, then, are the verbs sometimes rendered into the present tense in the AV?  Isn't this wrong?  No, it's not wrong.  Time is unexpressed in the text, both because the reference to creation is obvious, and because the focus is on God, as the One who alone is capable of such a mighty work.  Besides, it is not unknown to use the present tense to express things that are past.  “So I tell him what's on my mind, and what do you think he does?” This mode of speech occurs very commonly in the Greek New Testament as well, (i.e.  “Jesus saith (says) unto them...” Matthew 4:19).  It is used to bring the listener into the action, as if it were occurring in the present.  The AV's translators had a fine poetic and dramatic sense, and they used it here.  There was no danger of them being misunderstood at that time, for no one had ever proposed or imagined any theory of an “expanding universe”.
 
Is there further support for the claim that this “stretching out of the heavens” refers to the creation?  Indeed there is.  On day two of creation week, God makes the “firmament in the midst of the waters”(verse 6).  This firmament is identified as “heaven” in verse 8.  It is not what we call “outer space” that is referred to, for the creation account is only meant to explain the origin of those aspects of the universe that belong to the common experience of mankind. 
 
We do not know how much the patriarchs and prophets knew about the actual architecture of the cosmos.  But we do find in Scripture what is plainly phenomenological language, language that describes things from the viewpoint of the observer.  The sun “rises” and “goes down”.  Such language is useful; and if not pressed beyond its designed intent, perfectly true.  Consider what would have happened if each part of Scripture had recorded a specific scientific or cosmological terminology from the era in which it was written.  We know that cosmological models vary from time to time, so the Bible would inevitably, at some time or other, contradict itself.  At least, it would have made the interpretation of these passages much more difficult for us, who use modern models and terminology.
 
But besides, the “firmament” cannot be space, because space has no “waters above” it, as this firmament has (“the clouds”, per Proverbs 8:28; Psalms 148:4).  For the same reason, it cannot be the heaven in which God dwells.  It is the visible heaven, which looks to us as if it were a gigantic dome.  In this heaven the sun, moon and stars appear.  It is a highly-important part of our world, of which the simplest of men are aware.  This is especially true of agrarian  peoples.  Their lives are intimately related to, and dependent on, the state of the heavens.
 
Now lexicographers agree that the Hebrew word here translated “firmament” would be better rendered “expanse”.  This noun, pronounced raw-kee'-ah, is related to the verb, raw-kah', which we saw used in the quotation from Job above.  It refers to the process of forming a bowl out of sheet metal.  There are two ways to make a metal bowl in a pre-industrial world.  One is by “spinning”, done with a sort of lathe and a hard rounded forming tool; and the other is by hammering.  In both cases, the metal is expanded and spread out to form the bowl.  The spun bowl is smoother and more even, but it has concentric lines in the surface – the tracks of the forming tool.  But the lexicographers tell us that raw-kah' originally meant “to pound”, so the latter method is probably meant here.  In any case, God is here represented as creating an “expanse” which he calls the sky; which is the same thing as “expanding” or “stretching out” the sky.  This reference to the sky as an “expanse” in Genesis one supports the view that in other places in Scripture, the stretching out of the sky is to be understood as an accomplished fact, occurring in creation week, rather than something going on at present.  
 
The spreading of a tent is not an ongoing process.  Tents are designed to go up quickly.  It is a short-term process with a long-term result.  So, by the way, was creation.  God finished it in six days, as the Bible says.  To make it say anything else is really a stretch!
 
Howard Douglas King