Is the ‘greater exodus’ scriptural?

The Prophets speak of what’s been called a “greater exodus” from the nations to the land of Israel. The Scriptures tell us it, and the events preceding, will be so massive, it will eclipse the memory of the Exodus out of Egypt.

“It shall no longer be said, ‘As the Lord lives who brought up the people of Israel out of the land of Egypt,’ but ‘As the Lord lives who brought up the people of Israel out of the north country and out of all the countries where he had driven them.’ For I will bring them back to their own land that I gave to their fathers.”

Jeremiah 16:14–15; cp. Jeremiah 23:7–8

Based on the examples in Scripture (also in Ezekiel 37), this greater Exodus will be akin to a cattle drive. Heaven will make living in the nations so unpleasant and miserable for people called by His name that they will leave those nations. It was long foretold that the Messiah would do this work.

“If your outcasts are in the uttermost parts of heaven, from there the LORD your God will gather you, and from there he will take you. And the LORD your God will bring you into the land that your fathers possessed, that you may possess it.”

Deut. 30:4–5

This is how HaShem¹Hebrew: “The Name,” a circumlocution for YHWH. always causes large groups of His people to emigrate from one location to another. It is an unpleasant experience, but HaShem does this to drive His people to where He wants them to be, not to leave them where they are comfortable yet in danger of assimilation and spiritual death.

The nations will evict HaShem’s people out of their countries, just as the Egyptians begged the Israelites to leave after the 10 plagues were over. The nations will blame His people for the discomfort and misery HaShem inflicts on them, rather than looking inward at their own sin. 

However, we need to be very careful about overanalyzing current world events and trying to squeeze them into a particular prophesy. Newspaper eschatology is not a valid biblical exegesis. Rather, it can be eisegesis, or “interpretation of a text (as of the Bible) by reading into it one’s own opinions.”²“Eisegesis.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster. Accessed 30 Nov. 2025.

Ancient and modern views

In contemporary discussion, Jeremiah’s “greater exodus” remains one of the most contested and hope-laden texts — claimed by traditional Jews as still future, by many Christians as spiritually fulfilled in the Church, and by a growing number of Jewish and Christian Zionists as finding dramatic partial fulfillment in the modern State of Israel while still awaiting ultimate consummation. Here’s how ancient commentators have approached it.

Jewish interpretation (2nd Temple and rabbinic)

Literal future ingathering of exiles from the north and all lands: Virtually all pre-modern Jewish sources understood this as a real, future, massive regathering of Israel that would eclipse the Egyptian exodus in scope and glory.

Targum Jonathan (Aramaic paraphrase, c. 1st–7th century A.D.): Explicitly applies it to the final redemption and return from dispersion among the nations.

Rabbinic midrashim (e.g., Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael on Exodus 15; Pesikta Rabbati 31; Numbers Rabbah 11): The future redemption will be so spectacular that the Egyptian exodus will no longer be the primary oath formula; instead Jews will swear by the God “who brought us up from the north and from all the lands.”

Medieval Jewish commentators

Rashi (11th century): The “land of the north” = Babylon, but also implies broader dispersion.

RaDaK (KiMKhi): Primarily Babylon, yet the phrase “all the countries” points to a worldwide regathering in messianic times.

Ibn Ezra & Abarbanel: Stress that this is still future; the return under Ezra–Nehemiah was only partial and did not eclipse the memory of Egypt.

In short: Judaism almost unanimously saw this as a prophecy of the final, messianic-age ingathering that is still awaiting fulfillment.

Early Christian interpretation (1st–5th centuries)

Early Christians almost universally reinterpreted the exodus motif typologically and applied the “greater exodus” imagery to Christ and the Church, not to a future Jewish return to the land.

Apostolic Writings (New Testament)

While Jeremiah 16:14-15 is never quoted directly, the entire second-exodus motif is pervasive (e.g., Yeshua (Jesus) as the new Moses, the remnant of the Commonwealth of Israel coming out of spiritual “Egypt/Babylon”).

Church fathers

Justin Martyr (2nd century A.D.): The true exodus is from idolatry to the knowledge of Mashiakh (Christ).

Origen: Allegorizes the return from the “north” as return from the darkness of sin.

Augustine (City of God 18.27): “The Church” is the new Israel; the prophecies of return are fulfilled spiritually in the ingathering of Gentiles and believing Jews into Christ.

Jerome (Commentary on Jeremiah): Acknowledges the original Jewish hope but says it is fulfilled in “the Church.”

Patristic and medieval Christian tradition largely spiritualized or “churchified” the prophecy. A literal future Jewish return to the land was either denied or ignored.

Modern era (19th–21st century)

Scholarship is far more diverse and tends to be historical-critical rather than theological.

Classical critical view (Wellhausen, Duhm, Holladay, etc.)

• Deutero-Jeremiah composition (ca. 550–500 B.C.) during/after the Babylonian exile.
• Originally referred to the return from Babylonian exile under Cyrus (539 B.C.) and the early Persian period.
• The promise is deliberately hyperbolic: the return from Babylon will be so glorious that it will replace the Egyptian exodus in Israel’s memory.
• Most scholars note, however, that this never actually happened. The Egyptian exodus always remained the paradigmatic event, which is why many date the passage to an exilic or very early post-exilic redactor who still hoped for a triumphant return.

‘New Exodus’: Salvation-Historical School (mostly evangelical and some mainline scholars)

• Bernard Anderson, Walter Brueggemann (partly), N.T. Wright (in a modified Christian form), R.E. Clements, William Holladay (later work), and many Messianic Jewish and evangelical scholars.
• The prophecy was only partially fulfilled (or not fulfilled at all) by the Persian-period return.
• It points forward to a future, eschatological, worldwide regathering of Israel that will indeed be greater than the Egyptian exodus.
• Frequently linked with Isa 11:11-16, 43:16-21, 51:9-11; Ezek 20:34-38; and the “new exodus” theme throughout “Second Isaiah” (aka Deutero-Isaiah, Isaiah 40–55.

Zionist/modern Jewish scholarship

Yehuda Elitzur, Uriel Simon, and many Israeli biblical scholars:
The prophecy has seen a remarkable partial fulfillment in the modern ingathering of exiles to the State of Israel (1948–present), especially from the “land of the north” (former Soviet Union: around 1 million immigrants 1989–2005) and “all the countries.”
Most still regard it as not yet fully exhausted. The ultimate fulfillment awaits the messianic era.

Recent literary-canonical approaches

Scholars such as Christopher Seitz, Karl-Friedrich Pohlmann, and Leslie Allen emphasize that Jeremiah 30–33 (the “Book of Consolation”) deliberately presents a “new exodus / new covenant” program that transcends the historical return from Babylon and is left open-ended for future fulfillment.

Summary of interpretations

Tradition	Primary fulfillment	“Land of the north” meaning	Status today
Rabbinic / Traditional Jewish	Future messianic ingathering (still future)	Babylon + worldwide diaspora	Awaiting fulfillment
Church Fathers	Spiritual: Christ & Church	Sin, idolatry, Gentiles	Already fulfilled in Church
19th–20th century Critical	Return from Babylon (539–520 BCE)	Babylon	Fulfilled (but hyperbolically)
Evangelical / Messianic	Future eschatological regathering of Israel	Russia + global diaspora	Future or partially now
Modern Zionist Jewish	1948–present ingathering + final messianic era	USSR + all nations	Partially fulfilled; more to come
Canonical/Literary readings	Deliberately open-ended eschatological horizon	Symbolic + literal	Points beyond history

Comparison between Jeremiah & Isaiah

Aspect	Jeremiah’s greater Exodus (Jer 16:14-15; 23:7-8)	Isaiah’s new Exodus (esp. Isa 40–55)
Core promise	A future return so spectacular that Israel will stop swearing by the Egyptian exodus and instead swear by the God “who brought us up from the land of the north and from all the lands where he drove us.”	A new, miraculous deliverance from Babylon (and ultimately from all exile) that will eclipse the Egyptian exodus in glory (Isa 43:16-21; 48:21; 51:9-11; 52:11-12).
Key formula	“As the LORD lives who brought Israel up out of the land of the north and out of all the countries…” (replaces “out of Egypt”)	“Thus says the LORD, who makes a way in the sea… I am about to do a new thing” (43:16-19); the former things (Egypt) will not be remembered (43:18; 65:17).
Scope of ingathering	From the north (primary) + all countries wherever Israel was scattered. Emphasizes global diaspora.	CAlso Babylonian exile (Isa 40–55, composed ca. 550–539 B.C.), but More emphatically linked to Cyrus and the imminent fall of Babylon.
Historical anchor	Critical view: Written amid or after the Babylonian exile (started 597/587 B.C.). Conservative view: Written before the exile. “North” = the direction Babylon invaded from, and the return route.	Written amid the exile (ca. 550–539 B.C.). More emphatically linked to Cyrus and the imminent fall of Babylon.
Miraculous elements	Not heavily described; the miracle is mainly the scale and the fact that it overshadows Egypt.	Explicit replay and surpassing of Egyptian miracles: • Way in the sea + path in mighty waters (Isa 43:16; 51:10) • Water from rock in the desert (Isa 48:21; cf. Ex 17) • No thirst, guided by clouds/fire implied (Isa 52:12; cf. 4:5-6) • Fleeing “not in haste” (Isa 52:12) — the opposite of the panicked Egyptian exodus.
Role of the nations	Nations are mostly the places from which Israel returns; little said about their reaction.	Nations actively witness and are astonished (Isa 52:13-15); kings shut their mouths (Isa 52:15); some even help carry Israel home (Isa 49:22-23; 60–66).
Servant of the LORD	No mention of a Servant figure.	The Servant (individual or Israel) is central to enabling the new exodus (Isa 42:1-7; 49:5-6; 52:13–53:12).
New covenant aspect	Jeremiah links the return to the New Covenant written on the heart (Jer 31:31-34; 32:39-40) in the same “Book of Consolation.”	Isaiah never uses “new covenant” language, but has strong renewal motifs: new thing, new heavens/earth (Isa 43:19; 65:17), spirit poured out (Isa 44:3).
Eschatological horizon	Deliberately open-ended; the formula change (“they will no longer say…”) has never historically happened, so most pre-modern and many modern readers see it as still future.	Isaiah expects imminent historical fulfillment under Cyrus (fulfilled 539 B.C.; Ezra 1:1-4; 2Chron 36:22-23), yet the language constantly overshoots into eschatological hyperbole (e.g., Isa 55:12-13; 60–66).
Fulfillment in Jewish Tradition	Almost unanimously regarded as messianic / still future (or partially fulfilled only in modern State of Israel).	Originally applied to Persian-period return, but because the miracles never matched the rhetoric, later Jewish tradition also pushed it into the messianic future (e.g., “the exodus from Egypt will be forgotten” becomes a hallmark of the final redemption in midrash and liturgy).
Fulfillment in classical Christianity	Spiritualized: the true exodus is conversion to Christ and entry into “the Church.”	Heavily typological: Jesus’ resurrection and the inclusion of Gentiles are the true New Exodus (Matt 2:15; Luke 9:31 uses “exodus” for the cross/resurrection; Rev 18 applies Babylon-exodus to the Church).
Fulfillment in modern Zionist readings	Dramatic partial fulfillment in 20th–21st-century aliyah (“going up” to the Land of Israel), especially the million-plus Jews from the former USSR (“land of the north”). It is the primary prooftext because of the explicit “north + all lands” language and the million ex-Soviet olim.	Also cited for modern ingathering.

Differences and relationship

1. Jeremiah is more restrained and realistic in imagery but makes the boldest historical claim: the Egyptian exodus oath will actually be replaced — something that has never happened, keeping the prophecy stubbornly future-oriented for Jews.
2. Isaiah is lavish with replayed Egyptian plague/wilderness imagery and presents the new exodus as already beginning under Cyrus, yet constantly transcends history into cosmic renewal.
3. The two together form the classic “New Exodus” program of the Hebrew Scriptures:

• Isaiah supplies the vivid miraculous typology.
• Jeremiah supplies the global scope and the idea that this return will definitively outshine the first exodus in Israel’s memory and worship.

In contemporary Jewish thought (especially religious-Zionist), the two texts are usually read together as describing the same eschatological event, with Jeremiah 16:14-15 functioning as the litmus test: when the Egyptian exodus is no longer the primary oath-formula of Israel, the greater exodus has arrived. Many see the modern State of Israel as an astonishing “down-payment” on both prophetic visions.