For centuries, scholars and religious traditions have maintained that the Old Testament was written or compiled shortly after the events it describes, particularly during the time of Moses or shortly thereafter. This perspective suggested a historical timeline that placed many of the Old Testament texts as contemporary with the events themselves, such as the exodus from Egypt or the conquest of Canaan. However, recent scholarship—supported by archaeological discoveries, textual criticism, and findings from Egyptology—has provided compelling evidence that the Old Testament texts, as we know them today, were written and compiled much later, likely during the 6th to 5th centuries BCE. This post aims to present the case for the later dating of the Old Testament and provide solid supporting evidence from various fields of study, including archaeology, Egyptology, and biblical scholarship.
The Traditional View vs. The New Evidence
For much of history, it was assumed that Moses, traditionally considered the author of the Torah, wrote the first five books of the Bible around the 13th century BCE, with other biblical books following shortly after. This dating places the origins of the Old Testament close to the events they describe. However, numerous lines of evidence—from archaeological excavations to linguistic analysis—indicate that the biblical texts were actually compiled much later, particularly from the 7th to the 5th centuries BCE, with some of the final edits occurring even later.
Discrepancies in Early Biblical Events
One of the most persuasive arguments for a later compilation of the Old Testament comes from archaeology. Numerous excavations in Israel and the surrounding regions have failed to support the biblical narrative in its traditional form. Take the conquest of Canaan, for example, which is central to the books of Joshua and Judges. The Bible describes the Israelites conquering cities like Jericho and Ai, but archaeological digs at these sites have not revealed the destruction layers one would expect from a sudden military invasion.
Kathleen Kenyon’s excavation of Jericho in the 1950s found that the city’s walls had collapsed centuries before the traditional date of the conquest, around 1400 BCE. Similarly, there is no evidence of widespread destruction at Ai during the late Bronze Age, as the biblical account suggests. These discrepancies strongly imply that the stories of conquest were written long after the supposed events occurred, likely during a time of political upheaval or national crisis in the 7th century BCE, when Israel needed to establish its historical identity and justify its territorial claims.
Other findings, such as the lack of evidence for the Exodus event in Egypt and the wandering of the Israelites in the desert, further suggest that these narratives were constructed much later. While Egyptologists and archaeologists have found no evidence of a large-scale migration of Israelites from Egypt at the traditional time of the Exodus (circa 13th century BCE), it is likely that the Exodus story emerged later as a foundational myth, shaped by Israel’s experiences in exile and its desire to explain its origins in relation to Egypt.
The Exodus and Its Absence
The absence of direct archaeological evidence for the Exodus has been a focal point for scholars in the field of Egyptology. Not only is there no evidence of a mass departure of Israelites from Egypt, but also the Egyptian records from the New Kingdom period, which span the 15th to 11th centuries BCE, make no mention of such an event. Egyptologist Kenneth A. Kitchen, a leading expert on ancient Egypt and its relation to the Bible, has stated that there is no direct evidence from Egypt for the Exodus narrative, which suggests that the story was likely written much later than the events it describes, possibly during or after the Babylonian exile.
Kitchen’s work, On the Reliability of the Old Testament, argues that while the Egyptians may have had records of other major events, such as military conquests, they did not leave evidence of the kind of large-scale upheaval described in the Exodus. This absence in Egyptian sources suggests that the Exodus narrative was not a contemporary historical account, but rather a theological and nationalistic story that developed over time, likely during the late monarchy or the post-exilic period when Israel was reflecting on its past.
The Shaping of Israel’s Identity
In addition to archaeological and Egyptological evidence, textual criticism reveals a clear evolution in Israelite religion and society that supports a later date for the composition of many Old Testament texts. The shift from polytheism to monotheism is one of the most significant theological developments in the Old Testament, and it did not happen overnight. The early Israelite religion, as seen in texts like the Song of Deborah in Judges, suggests a henotheistic belief system in which Yahweh was considered the supreme god, but not the only god. This is consistent with archaeological findings of ancient Israelite religious practices, which show evidence of the worship of multiple gods in early Israel.
However, over time, particularly during the 7th and 6th centuries BCE, Israel’s religious beliefs became increasingly monotheistic, culminating in the strong monotheism seen in the later prophetic writings and historical books. This theological shift is reflected in the texts themselves, as seen in books like Isaiah, which emphasize the singularity of Yahweh as the one true God. The finalization of this monotheistic worldview likely occurred during or after the Babylonian exile, when the Israelites were forced to grapple with their identity and the loss of their kingdom.
The process of compiling and editing these texts was likely a response to the political and social changes that occurred during the exile. The focus on covenant, law, and divine punishment in books like Deuteronomy and Jeremiah reflects a period of introspection and redefinition of Israel’s relationship with Yahweh, which points to a later composition, possibly in the 6th or 5th centuries BCE.
Compiled During the Exile
The Deuteronomistic History, a scholarly term for the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, is often thought to have been compiled or edited during the Babylonian exile. Scholars such as Martin Noth have argued that these books were not written in their entirety at the time of the events they describe, but were edited or compiled by a group of scribes during the 6th century BCE. This group, which may have been influenced by the Deuteronomistic reforms of King Josiah, aimed to provide a coherent theological narrative that explained Israel’s history in terms of its covenant with Yahweh.
The emphasis on covenant, law, and the consequences of disobedience in these books is consistent with the concerns of a people exiled and seeking to understand their fall from grace. As Noth and other scholars suggest, this editing process likely took place after the exile, when the Israelites were seeking to preserve their identity and reassert their religious beliefs.
Expert Opinions and Supporting Evidence
Numerous scholars and experts in archaeology, Egyptology, and biblical studies have supported the argument that the Old Testament texts were written much later than traditionally believed.
- William G. Dever, an archaeologist known for his work on biblical archaeology, states that much of the biblical narrative cannot be corroborated by archaeological evidence, suggesting that these texts were likely written in later periods, particularly the 7th and 6th centuries BCE.
- Kenneth A. Kitchen, Egyptologist and expert on ancient Near Eastern history, argues that the lack of direct Egyptian evidence for the Exodus suggests that the story was not an eyewitness account but a later construction, possibly reflecting Israel’s exile and its desire to connect its origins to Egypt.
- Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, in The Bible Unearthed, also support the idea that the biblical texts, particularly the stories of the conquest of Canaan, were written much later than traditionally believed, arguing that these stories were reworked as theological and nationalistic narratives.
A More Recent Compilation of the Old Testament
The cumulative evidence from archaeology, Egyptology, and textual criticism overwhelmingly supports the view that the Old Testament texts were written and compiled much later than the events they describe. The discrepancies between the biblical narrative and archaeological evidence, the absence of supporting Egyptian records, the theological evolution of Israelite religion, and the political and social context of the post-exilic period all point to a later composition date, likely in the 6th to 5th centuries BCE. These texts, rather than being direct historical accounts, were shaped over time as theological reflections on Israel’s past and its relationship with Yahweh.
The Old Testament, therefore, is not a collection of contemporary accounts but a compilation of writings shaped by centuries of history, religious development, and political change. The later dating of these texts is not only supported by archaeological and Egyptological evidence but is also essential for understanding the evolution of Israel’s religious identity.
Sources
- Dever, William G. What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? Eerdmans, 2001.
- Finkelstein, Israel, and Neil Asher Silberman. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts. Free Press, 2001.
- Kitchen, Kenneth A. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Eerdmans, 2003.
- Noth, Martin. The Deuteronomistic History. Sheffield Academic Press, 1991.
- VanderKam, James C. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. 3rd ed., Eerdmans, 2010.
- Kenyon, Kathleen M. Jericho: City and Necropolis. British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem, 1960.