Jephthah’s ‘Three Hundred Years’: Evidence for the Early Exodus
It’s an ongoing, grinding debate: When did the biblical Exodus take place? There are what could be described as two primary camps: those in favor of an early, 15th-century b.c.e. Exodus during Egypt’s 18th Dynasty (the Thutmosid Dynasty); and those in favor of a late, 13th-century b.c.e. Exodus during Egypt’s 19th Dynasty (the Ramesside Dynasty). As followers of our website will be aware, we have argued at some length in favor of the 15th-century b.c.e. Exodus. There are manifold other positions on the date of the Exodus; the above represents arguably the two most commonly held, opposing positions. (Another comparatively popular position also maintains an early, 15th-century b.c.e. Exodus but significantly rearranges Egyptian chronology to have this align with the end of the Second Intermediate Period.)
1 Kings 6:1 is the most widely used scripture by proponents for the early date of the Exodus. “And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign … he began to build the house of the Lord.” With Solomon’s reign recognized as beginning in the first half of the 10th century b.c.e., 480 years prior puts us somewhere around the middle of the 15th century b.c.e. Or more specifically, with his temple building project widely dated to 967 b.c.e., that would put the Exodus at circa 1446 b.c.e.
A literal reading of this passage is, of course, entirely incompatible with the popular 13th-century b.c.e. Exodus—a time frame nearly 200 years shorter. As such, late-date proponents typically dismiss the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 as being simply “symbolic”—an example of so-called Distanzangaben, merely figurative numerology associated with an important event.
Bolstering the early date, literal interpretation of 1 Kings 6:1 is a key secondary piece of biblical evidence: Judges 11:26. But it’s one for which there are also late-date counterarguments. Do they stand up to scrutiny?
‘Three Hundred Years’
Judges 11 records the history of one of the later biblical judges, Jephthah, on the scene somewhere around 1100 b.c.e. Israel at the time was being attacked by the Ammonites, who sought to reclaim territory lost by them centuries earlier—land they demanded the Israelites relinquish.
Numbers 21 describes the context of this territorial loss: The Ammonites, along with the Moabites, had been defeated by the Amorite kings Sihon and Og, who had conquered parts of these territories for their own. Israel, at the time of the conquest of Canaan, had intentionally skirted around the then Ammonite- and Moabite-held territories, instead seeking passage into Canaan through this Amorite-held land (based on a command from God to Israel not to discomfit their distant Ammonite and Moabite relatives; e.g. Deuteronomy 2:9, 19). After being denied passage, the Amorites mobilized forces against the Israelites and were summarily defeated—Israel absorbing the Amorite-held territory as their own. This eastern, Transjordan area conquered from Sihon and Og would go on to become the territories of the tribes of Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh.
Fast-forward to the time of Jephthah: “[T]he king of the children of Ammon answered unto the messengers of Jephthah: ‘Because Israel took away my land, when he came up out of Egypt, from the Arnon even unto the Jabbok, and unto the Jordan; now therefore restore those cities peaceably’” (Judges 11:13).
Jephthah’s reply makes clear that any land in question taken by the Israelites was taken from the Amorites, not the Ammonites—and besides, the Israelite ownership of these territories had not been an issue for centuries: “Thus saith Jephthah: Israel took not away the land of Moab, nor the land of the children of Ammon. … Israel possessed all the land of the Amorites, the inhabitants of that country. … So now the Lord, the God of Israel, hath dispossessed the Amorites from before His people Israel, and shouldest thou possess them?” (verses 15, 21, 23).
Verse 26 is key in Jephthah’s response to the king of Ammon: “While Israel dwelt in Heshbon and its towns, and in Aroer and its towns, and in all the cities that are along by the side of the Arnon, three hundred years; wherefore did ye not recover them within that time?” Jephthah is essentially saying, We’ve been here for 300 years. Why are you only now trying to take this land for yourself?
With biblical chronology putting Jephthah on the scene somewhere around 1100 b.c.e., Israel’s entry into Canaan and conquest of these regions occurred roughly around 1400 b.c.e. Forty years of sojourning prior would put the Exodus in the middle of the 15th century b.c.e.—lining up in remarkable harmony with the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1.
Not so fast, say late-date proponents.
Jephthah—‘Blubbering Idiot’
A key avenue of dismissal is to undermine this biblical judge as an untrustworthy source. An example of this was highlighted in a Sept. 6, 2022, On Script: Biblical World podcast featuring Dr. Chris McKinny and Dr. Mark Janzen, titled “Early or Late Emergence of Israel.”
“I throw Jephthah out altogether—he’s a blubbering idiot,” late-date proponent Janzen stated, citing as an example Jephthah’s rash vow prior to combat that ended in tragedy (Judges 11:30-40). “So I don’t think he’s a credible source, and I don’t think holding to ‘inspiration’ requires us to say, ‘Oh, Jephthah said it, it must be true,’ any more than we should think that what the devil tempts Jesus with is a proper use of Scripture. … Jephthah’s not a great source.”
A similar sentiment was stated by popular YouTube Christian apologist and late-date proponent Michael Jones on a recent livestream: “One of the points, talking about Jephthah and how incompetent he is in a lot of ways—in terms of theology, in terms of his ability to negotiate with the Ammonites—he’s just all around portrayed as just an idiot.” The inference being, then, that his statement of 300 years elapsing from the conquest to his time should be taken with a grain of salt.
More than likely criticism of this sort will be jarring to some. Is it fair?
It’s at least a curious line of reasoning, especially coming from Christian apologists. That’s because, outside of the Judges 11 account, there are two other passages that reference Jephthah. Far from either leveling criticism against the man, both exhibit a level of recognition and praise for him. 1 Samuel 12:11 lists Jephthah alongside the likes of Samuel and Gideon as a man sent by God to save Israel—each of them blessings for the nation that Israel was quick to forget and disregard. And in the 11th chapter of the New Testament book of Hebrews—often referred to as the “faith chapter”—Jephthah is listed as one of the outstanding examples of faith in the Bible (verse 32), among those individuals for whom “the world was not worthy” (verse 38). “[T]hese all”—including Jephthah—“obtained a good report” (verse 39).
Ironic, then, that Jephthah should receive such a damning report as “just an idiot.” Was Jephthah perfect? Far from it. Did he make a tragic, spur-of-the-moment decision? Certainly. But based on these other passages, I would at least be reticent to brand him a “blubbering idiot,” especially not to bolster something as weak as an ad hominem argument anyway. That’s because questions of Jephthah’s character and ability—whether justified or not—are smoke and mirrors in the debate over the accuracy of Jephthah’s 300-year claim.
An extreme example: What about Adolf Hitler? One could hardly pick a more despicable human being, nor a more blubbering book of anti-Semitic idiocy than Mein Kampf. Yet for all this man’s depravity, when in this book he describes “the past three hundred years [of] the history of our Continent … since the reign of Queen Elizabeth,” one is hardly left wondering whether the roughly 300 years that elapsed following her reign to the writing of Mein Kampf was actually closer to 150 years, or some unknowable, indefinite, or figurative period of time—no matter how deranged the author—especially not if this happened to be already a secondary piece of evidence leading to the same conclusion—just as Judges 11:26 is to 1 Kings 6:1.
Reasons to Doubt the Length?
Some late-date proponents at least attempt to add nuance to this position of blanket dismissal of Jephthah. Staunch 13th-century b.c.e. Exodus proponent Dr. David Falk, for example, attempts to identify other “errors” in Jephthah’s message, such as Chemosh being a Moabite god, not the Ammonite god Milcom, etc. These points were highlighted in a 2022 YouTube debate with early-date proponent Dr. Titus Kennedy, “When Did the Exodus Happen?” Each of these “errors” are highly interpretive and debatable, however (for example, the opinion that Chemosh was originally the god of both the brother-nations Moab and Ammon, with Milcom only referenced as the chief Ammonite deity in later centuries). And again, such “errors” have no direct bearing on whether or not Israel really had been in the land for 300 years—much less indicating that Israel had been in the land for half that time period or less (as the late-date position would require).
Late-date proponent Prof. James Hoffmeier offers probably the most conceivable (or at least, the most charitable) response, in arguing that Jephthah’s statement “could be a case of hyperbole that is intentionally exaggerating the time in order to strengthen his dispute with the Ammonites” (“What Is the Biblical Date for the Exodus? A Response to Bryant Wood,” 2007). This could be a conceivable objection—haven’t we all been guilty of overstating arguments through hyperbole at some point?—although overinflating Israel’s time in the land by at least 100 percent seems highly unlikely, certainly from a negotiating standpoint against a king with knowledge about his nation’s historic grievances. Furthermore, there is no record of the king of Ammon contesting this claim (nor any of Jephthah’s other claims, for that matter).
In the end, this claim of Jephthah using “hyperbole,” or any form of error elsewhere, is simply conjectural dismissal in order to arrive at a different, preconceived conclusion for the time period of the Exodus. It is at best a weak hypothetical argument when viewing Judges 11 in isolation—but the fact that both the 300- and 480-year biblical periods land with unanimity on the same general timeframe renders this view all the more unlikely. The unanimity of these passages is certainly more than coincidence.
Perhaps a more practical objection—rather than questioning Jephthah’s character or negotiating honesty—is sometimes asked: How could Jephthah have known how much time had elapsed since the conquest anyway? Israel, at the time of the judges, was a decentralized, fractured entity, without a strong administrative monarchical center keeping records. This was, comparatively speaking, Israel’s jahiliyyah—an “age of ignorance” or “barbarism.” How much of a grasp on historical chronology could someone like Jephthah have had anyway?
This objection is answered by the fact that Israel, uniquely, did not need a constant, royal administrative hand in determining the passage of time—Israel’s entire agricultural system was built around the critical and careful calculation of blocks of time. This is most notably seen with the passage of land sabbath (Leviticus 25, to be marked every seven years), and jubilee (same chapter, to be marked after every 49 years. Jubilee calculations could also account for the biblical repetition of general 40-year blocks of time during the judges period—the ability to generalize lesser-specified periods, at least as they would have fallen within jubilee cycles).
Just Arbitrary Anchoring?
There is an additional, related point of criticism surrounding the 300 years of Jephthah: The placement of Jephthah’s tenure circa 1100 b.c.e. This dating of Jephthah, as commonly given by early-date proponents, is presented by late-date proponents as being unclear from the biblical account—thus merely the product of circular reasoning, in order to have Jephthah’s 300 years line up with circa 1400 b.c.e., and thus fit with calculations for the 480-year period of 1 Kings 6:1.
It bears repeating from the outset that no reconstruction or redating of Jephthah comes anywhere close to aligning with a late-date Exodus and conquest (instead, the timeframe would at best be closer to 150 years shorter). But is this dating of Jephthah to circa 1100 b.c.e. really so arbitrary and unknowable?
Again, chronologically, Jephthah is one of the final judges on the scene toward the end of the judges period, but we can be more specific.
The dates for Israel’s rulers going back to David are fairly well established, with David beginning his reign from Hebron circa 1010 b.c.e. There is some level of debate about the length of King Saul’s reign prior. As argued in our article “How Long Was the Reign of King Saul?”, based on a number of biblical clues, his reign should best be given as 42 years, thus beginning circa 1050 b.c.e. (continuing here to use general, round numbers). The Prophet Samuel served as judge for an unspecified length of time prior to Saul’s reign. While the Bible does not say how long, the first-century historian Josephus gives 12 years. Cumulatively, this would put the beginning of Samuel’s judgeship very roughly somewhere between 1070–1060 b.c.e. It was at this same time—the start of Samuel’s judgeship—that the judges-period Philistine yoke of oppression was finally broken, as described in 1 Samuel 7. Judges 13:1 states that this Philistine oppression lasted 40 years—thus putting the start of the oppression circa 1110–1100 b.c.e.
Judges 10 is a critical passage at this juncture. Verses 7-10 demonstrate that the Philistine and Ammonite oppressions began at the same time. While the Philistines began to oppress Israel from the west, the Ammonites began to oppress the Transjordan Israelites from the east, for what would be a period of 18 years (verse 8). This, then—speaking very roundly—does put Jephthah on the scene around 1100 b.c.e. (or perhaps in the years just following, in his dealings with the Ammonites).
Similar calculations could be demonstrated working forward in time from the Exodus and conquest to arrive at the same general timeframe for Jephthah. The point is made, though—even given a degree of debate about the length of governorship of Saul and Samuel, the dating of Jephthah to somewhere roughly around 1100 b.c.e. is less than controversial.
The real question is, where do late-date proponents put Jephthah—or any of the other manifold judges and judges-period events, for that matter? How are the numerous timeframes and events found in the book of Judges to be compressed down into a barely 200-year period, before the rise of Israel’s monarchy?
‘Fiddling’ With the Unambiguous
Ronald Hendel, professor of Hebrew Bible and Jewish Studies, is no believer in the literal accuracy of the Bible’s account for the Exodus and judges periods. (Instead, he holds to a rather more vague “cultural memory” view.) Still, he does aptly observe this debate about the biblical Exodus timeframe, noting the clearly “unambiguous biblical testimony for the date of the exodus. Yet distinguished evangelical scholars will fiddle with this date,” in reinterpreting or explaining away such passages as 1 Kings 6:1 and Judges 11:26.
“The biblical chronology is wrong, but the faithful scholar can correct it,” he writes in “The Exodus as Cultural Memory View” (in Five Views on the Exodus: Historicity, Chronology, and Theological Implications). “But it is also a departure from the plain sense of the Bible …. Identifying the Bible’s errors and replacing them with historically plausible reconstructions is a curious strategy for evangelical scholars. It clearly departs from the traditional doctrine of inerrancy.”
He’s right. In the vein of the Judges 11 passage, some, it seems, have “hearkened not unto the words of Jephthah which he sent” (verse 28).
Nor the words of the Egyptian historian Manetho—but that will save for another article.
Read More:
What Is the Correct Time Frame for the Exodus and Conquest of the Promised Land?
The ‘480 Years’ of 1 Kings 6:1: Just a Symbolic Number?
The ‘Raamses’ of Exodus 1:11: Timestamp of Authorship? Or Anachronism?
Manetho’s Exodus Pharaoh, ‘Amenophis’ (Amenhotep): Any Reason to Doubt?
Who Was the Pharaoh of the Exodus?
The Amarna Letters: Proof of Israel’s Invasion of Canaan?
Amenhotep II as Exodus Pharaoh—With a Low Egyptian Chronology?