Should Christians Use the Moses Inscriptions to Establish the Existence of the Biblical Moses?

Should Apologists Jump on the Moses’ Inscriptions as Evidence of the Biblical Moses? Given my tendency to post about archaeology (which I find fascinating), I am both surprised and not surprised to find that I have not posted very often about the Exodus over the years. For those who are not familiar with the Bible, the Exodus refers to the same story that many non-Christians would identify with the movie The Ten Commandments. It was the time that the Israelites were held in Egypt as slaves to an unnamed Pharoah for what appears to be around 400 years. Finally, God called Moses, an Israelite who had been raised in Pharoah’s house, to lead the people of Israel out of Egypt.

Unfortunately, the Israelites did not make a beeline between Egypt and the land that was promised to them by God. Rather, due to their stiff-necked ways, God had them wander in the desert for forty years before they finally made it to what is now known as Israel. The fuller account of this forty-year journey can be found in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

So, why haven’t I written much about it? Well, quite simply, archaeological evidence of the Exodus has been scant. There was very little evidence that the Israelites had ever been slaves in Egypt, let alone an Exodus of a large number of people across the desert by a figure who many say was a myth – sort of like Robin Hood or Paul Bunyan.

Those of us who dabbled in Biblical archaeology all leaned the saying (which contained an undeniable truth) that “lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.” In other words, when it comes to archaeology, the world is a big place. To claim, as some did, that the Exodus didn’t happen because archaeologists had not yet found evidence of it always seemed to be a big leap.

But now, it is just possible that the evidence that was lacking has been found. Per an article in Archaeology News entitled Moses may be named in ancient Egyptian mine inscriptions, sparking debate over earliest biblical references, it may be that archaeology have discovered not one, but two ancient references to Moses in, unsurprisingly, Egypt.

Per the article:

A new interpretation of 3,800-year-old inscriptions discovered in an Egyptian turquoise mine has reopened one of archaeology’s most controversial debates: Did Moses, the biblical leader of the Exodus, ever exist?

Independent researcher Michael S. Bar-Ron believes the answer lies in the Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions carved into rock walls at Serabit el-Khadim, an Egyptian Sinai Peninsula mine site. After eight years of study using high-resolution photos and 3D scans provided by Harvard’s Semitic Museum, Bar-Ron says he has discovered two inscriptions reading “zot mi’Moshe” — Hebrew for “This is from Moses” — and “ne’um Moshe”, which means “A saying of Moses.”

If verified, these would be the oldest extra-biblical inscriptional references to Moses, a figure long documented in religious tradition but never confirmed by archaeology. The inscriptions are part of a group of over two dozen Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions first unearthed by Sir William Flinders Petrie early in the 20th century. These writings, which were likely created by Semitic-speaking laborers during the reign of Pharaoh Amenemhat III (c. 1800 BC), represent some of the earliest alphabetic texts known, even predating Phoenician.

As noted in the article, the inscriptions have not yet been verified, but it is a potentially exciting find. But putting on my Christian apologist hat, I am not ready to jump on board and announce to the world that these inscriptions are actually connected to the Biblical Moses.

The lack of a rush to make that claim is understandable. Inscriptions from 3800 years ago (approximately 1800 BC) would necessarily be difficult to verify for several reasons. First, the dating would be subject to questioning. Usually, items are dated based on other items discovered around them. For example, if I find an item in a dig from what is believed to be a 7th Century castle in France, it would be logical that the items was also from the 7th Century. But that is not necessarily the case – the item could be from an earlier period and left at the site, or it could have been brought to the site centuries later. Thus, just because the inscriptions were found to be on a site that is believed to be 3800 years old does not necessarily mean that the inscriptions themselves are that old.

Second, even if archaeologists are confident in the dates, the writing is very old and difficult to read clearly. The language used is described as proto-semitic, i.e., it is made up of letters that are part of the earliest known alphabet that is believed to be semitic in origin. Deciphering ancient languages is incredibly difficult if you don’t have a source document (see, for example, the Rosetta Stone) which can be used as the basis for interpreting exactly what the letters stand for. And, to top it off, ancient semitic writings do not use vowels and run the words together. (See, Hebrew as the Language behind the World’s First Alphabet? as an article with a good description of the difficulty of interpreting ancient texts.)

Third, supposing we can establish with certainty the time period and the reference to Moses is clear, who is to say that this is the same Moses? It certainly seems that the dating of these documents would precede the dates ordinarily given to the Exodus. Since archaeologists have largely claimed that there is no evidence for the Exodus, I don’t know how we could come to any particular date through archaeology. Still, there are some dates that are generally agreed upon as the dates of the Exodus:

Analyzing the nuances of how archaeologists and scholars date ancient events, such as found in the book of Exodus, is well beyond the scope of a single article or the ability of a typical reader. Records of ancient Egyptian history are especially notorious for being erratic, full of internal contradictions and exaggerations, and overly flattering to whoever was ruling at the time. Secular Egyptology is the subject of ongoing debates about how and where to date certain milestones. Discussions about interpretation and translation occur within biblical studies. Competing facts and assumptions result in a dizzying array of possibilities.

From this chaos emerge two dates, consistently seen as the most likely moments for Israel’s exodus from Egypt. These are 1446 BC and 1225 BC, respectively labeled the “early” and “late” dates. Each has biblical, logical, and archaeological support, as well as corresponding weaknesses. What was the date of the exodus from Egypt?

This inscription, however, at least preliminarily, appears to be dated around the year 1800 BC – around 250 years after the date of the “early” date for the Exodus.

Still, isn’t it interesting that the writings were found in Egypt, and that the writings are clearly semitic in origin (and the proto-semitic alphabet is arguably created by ancient Israelites). And the Pharaoh who is currently believed to have ruled at that time, Pharaoh Amenemhat III, was (according to Co-Pilot) “known for his extensive building projects, economic prosperity, and contributions to the Middle Kingdom's cultural zenith.”

Given that that the Biblical book of Exodus describes the Israelites as slaving in what are clearly building projects (Exodus 1:11 – “Therefore [the Egyptians] did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses”), and given that the Biblical timeline can be extended back earlier than the “late” date without causing too much violence to the Biblical text, isn’t it interesting that there are what appear to be references to Moses found in ancient inscriptions of the time?

Note: One might argue that if we could date the construction of the cities of Pithom and Rameses, it would set the dates for the Exodus. I would agree, but there are many questions in dating those cities, too. Quite simply, we don’t know where these cities were located. Pithom has been traditionally identified with either Tell el-Maskhuta or Tell el-Retaba. While a thorough review of the evidence for the location of ancient Pithom is beyond the scope of this post, it seems apparent that the fact that two locations (granted, they are close together) have been identified as the site of Pithom raises doubts about that identification. While only one site has been identified as the site of Rameses, but a preliminary review suggest that it has been selected because it was a city built by Rameses – the pharaoh often seen as the Biblical pharaoh. I am personally not satisfied at all that these sites were the two cities referenced in Exodus 1:11.

There is really very little that I am seeing at my preliminary review that would dictate that the usual dates cannot be pushed back the 350 years needed to establish this as the Moses of the Bible. Having said that, I am aware that there would be a need to connect up the dates with the dates for the destruction of Jericho and other Biblical events described when the Israelites entered the promised land in the Book of Judges. That is also another investigation for another day.

Finally, let’s suppose that this is a different Moses – some type of predecessor to the Moses of the Bible. Even then, the inscriptions would be evidence for the existence of the Moses of the Exodus for the same reason that similar names served as evidence for Goliath of Gath. As I noted in my earlier post entitled Goliath of Gath – Was He a Real Person?, the fact that the name Moses is shown to exist at about the same time as the events described in Exodus is evidence that a person could be named Moses in the culture at the time of the Exodus.

Bottom line, I am not ready to proclaim these inscriptions to be the Moses of Exodus, but I certainly don’t discount it, and even if it is not, it still lends support that someone name Moses could have existed at the time of Exodus since the name would not be unprecedented for the time.