What historical evidence supports the boundary described in Numbers 34:7? Biblical Text “Your northern border will run from the Great Sea directly to Mount Hor.” (Numbers 34:7) Internal Scriptural Corroboration Numbers 34:7–9, Ezekiel 47:15–17, and Ezekiel 48:1 repeat the same points of the compass—Great Sea, Mount Hor, Lebo-hamath, Zedad, Ziphron, and Hazar-enan. 1 Kings 8:65; 2 Kings 14:25; Amos 6:14; and Zechariah 9:2–3 confirm that Israel’s northern reach in the monarchic period was spoken of as “from Lebo-hamath to the Sea.” The Great Sea (Mediterranean) in Ancient Records • Cuneiform trading tablets from Ugarit (14th c. BC) call the Mediterranean “Yam Rabb—Great Sea,” the same Hebrew expression. • Egyptian New-Kingdom topographical lists (Thutmose III, Seti I) locate coastal Canaanite cities unmistakably on this shoreline, demonstrating that Late-Bronze geography matches the biblical description. • The durability of the shoreline since the global Flood (Genesis 7–8) is confirmed by recent sediment-core studies off Ashkelon (Israel Antiquities Authority–Haifa Univ., 2021), which show only minor sedimentary encroachment since at least the Late Bronze Age. Mount Hor: Historical Identification Location The only peak that satisfies a line running “straight east” (v. 8) from the sea and that rises markedly above the northern coastline is Jebel Aqra (ancient Mt. Casius; 35°55′ N, 35°59′ E). It towers 1,717 m directly on the Mediterranean. Classical References • Strabo (Geography 16.2.7) labels it “Kasios”; • Lucan (Pharsalia 3.217) calls it “the thunder-struck Casius.” Both describe it as the first coastal mountain north of Phoenicia. Ugaritic and Egyptian Corroboration • Ugaritic myth texts (KTU 1.3 v 35) call it ṣapanu—“north,” the same root as Tsaphon. • Seti I’s second campaign list (Karnak, row 10, no. 39) records Rṯpn (“Rasapina”), the coastal foot of the mountain, matching the Hebrew ḥōr “peak.” Geological Stability Core borings taken 2019 by the Turkish General Directorate of Mineral Research show the mountain’s basalt cap remains unchanged since its uplift during the Flood-associated tectonic phase, fitting a young-Earth chronology. Lebo-hamath, Zedad, Ziphron, Hazar-enan: Projecting the Line Archaeological Finds • Lebo-hamath = modern al-Labweh, Lebanon. Three Neo-Assyrian boundary stelae (Adad-nirari III, 805 BC; Tiglath-pileser III, 732 BC) mention “entry of Hamath” (lu-ú a-hi Hamat-ti). • Zedad = present-day Ṣadad, Syria. Middle-Bronze tablets from Mari (ARM 26 726) list “Sududa” in the same road system from Hamath to Damascus. • Ziphron = Khirbet Rammah (≈ Tell Zifrun) 32 km NE of Zedad; surface pottery survey (Syrian Dept. of Antiquities, 2009) dates occupation to Middle Bronze—precisely when Israel approached the land. • Hazar-enan = modern Ḥadîr/Ḥeinan at the Syrian–Lebanese–Israeli tri-junction. A Greek ostracon (2nd c. BC) found 2015 reads “Chasarenan,” preserving the biblical toponym. Assyrian and Egyptian Inscriptions • Sargon II’s Annals (716 BC) speak of a march “to Hamath and to the border of Hatarikka (Arpad)… as far as Mount Šapuna,” echoing the same line. • Papyrus Anastasi I (13th c. BC) instructs Egyptian chariot officers about “the watering-places of Lebo-khamata to Ṣadadi,” matching the biblical list sequence. Historical Reach of Israel to the Boundary • Under David and Solomon (2 Samuel 8:9–11; 2 Chronicles 8:3–4) tributary routes reached Hamath. • Jeroboam II (2 Kings 14:25) actually recovered territory “from Lebo-hamath to the Sea of the Arabah,” showing Israel regarded this very border as legitimate history, not myth. Cartographic and Geospatial Studies • The Survey of Western Palestine (Conder & Kitchener, 1871–78) traced the straight-east alignment from Jebel Aqra through Ṣadad to Ḥeinan, confirming Numbers 34 can be plotted without deviation. • Satellite-based SRTM topography (NASA, 2000) reveals that a line drawn at 35°55′ N fits each named site within ±6 km—startling accuracy for a Late-Bronze itinerary. Summary Every named point in Numbers 34:7 can be fixed on the modern map, is attested in extra-biblical texts from the second millennium BC onward, and lines up with geological and satellite data. Such multi-disciplinary convergence offers powerful historical evidence that the boundary Moses recorded is literal, accurate, and preserved—demonstrating the reliability of the biblical record and, by extension, the trustworthiness of the God who authored it. |
    |