Evidence for God from Science

Just thought I would stir things up a bit.

I have always been told, and I somewhat believed, that the genealogies in the bible have provable gaps. I have searched, but the only 'provable gaps' I can find are “son of” and “father of” could mean “grandson of” and “Grandpa of”. I've also seen the differences between various genealogies that omit or add in generations of people.

However, I began to look for myself. Many bible genealogies (so far I have gotten from Adam to Jacob) include ages. Example, when Adam was 130 he bore Seth, when Seth was 105 he bore Enosh, and so down the line to Jacob, father of the twelve tribes.

I haven't finished studying, nor have I compared it to other genealogies (like the New Testament ones), but if this is true, then wouldn't Adam be the first literal Human X number of years ago? It's not really logical to assume gaps in the genealogies if I can trace them with ages from Jacob back to Adam (and i'm pretty sure i could do better than that with enough digging).

If anyone is curious, I can provide verses and send my notes PM to you. But I thought this very interesting, it would certainly put into question how long people have been around. (a side note, I still think it possible for the earth be billions of years old, but that is covered in a different forum ).

Enigma7457 wrote:Just thought I would stir things up a bit.

I have always been told, and I somewhat believed, that the genealogies in the bible have provable gaps. I have searched, but the only 'provable gaps' I can find are “son of” and “father of” could mean “grandson of” and “Grandpa of”. I've also seen the differences between various genealogies that omit or add in generations of people.

However, I began to look for myself. Many bible genealogies (so far I have gotten from Adam to Jacob) include ages. Example, when Adam was 130 he bore Seth, when Seth was 105 he bore Enosh, and so down the line to Jacob, father of the twelve tribes.

I haven't finished studying, nor have I compared it to other genealogies (like the New Testament ones), but if this is true, then wouldn't Adam be the first literal Human X number of years ago? It's not really logical to assume gaps in the genealogies if I can trace them with ages from Jacob back to Adam (and i'm pretty sure i could do better than that with enough digging).

If anyone is curious, I can provide verses and send my notes PM to you. But I thought this very interesting, it would certainly put into question how long people have been around. (a side note, I still think it possible for the earth be billions of years old, but that is covered in a different forum ).

If of course all the People had a Male Counterpart to be apart of that Geneaology. And if they did not?? Would it then be picked up by a Person with the Same name as their Grandfather etc...

However on another Side we also notice that "civilization" writings, crafts, etc... were in around the 10,000 to 6,000 range....

Hmmmmm

bizzt wrote:If of course all the People had a Male Counterpart to be apart of that Geneaology. And if they did not?? Would it then be picked up by a Person with the Same name as their Grandfather etc...

Not sure i follow what you mean. Could you elaborate?

Enigma7457 wrote:

bizzt wrote:If of course all the People had a Male Counterpart to be apart of that Geneaology. And if they did not?? Would it then be picked up by a Person with the Same name as their Grandfather etc...

Not sure i follow what you mean. Could you elaborate?

First off do you see one Girl/Lady in the Genealogies? If you had 2 Girls for example and no Boys then what would happen? What if your Boys Died? plausible situations? If there was say 4 generations without a Boy? Anyways those are just some thoughts about Genealogies.

i understand now what you meant. But it doesn't read that way. True, many genealogies in the bible simply say, so and so is the father (or ancester) of so and so. But look at the verses below:

Gen 5:3 "WHen Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likenes, in his own image; and he named him Seth...

Gen 5:6 "When Seth had lived 105 yeasr, he became the father of Enosh...

Gen 5:9 "When Enosh had loved 90 years, he became the father of Kenan..."

Now, i understand father and can mean ancester, but it says 130 years, 105 years, 90 years. So it doesn't matter. When Adam was 130, Seth was 0. When Seth was 105 (and Adam 235) Enosh was 0. When Enosh was 90 (and Adam 325, and Seth 195) Kenan was 0.

This trend continues from Adam all the way to Jacob. So we technically know (at the time Jacob is born) how many years ago Adam was born. I'm not past Jacob yet (can't find anymore genealogies with ages). But either way, Jacob moved to Egypt and the Isrealites lived there 400 years before they left. So if we know when they left egypt, we can backtrack to when Adam was formed.

This odd looking link will take you to an online book, which expands on an idea suggesting a slightly different way of looking at the genealogies in Genesis.
http://209.10.202.163/graphical/literat ... en_01.html

The book notes some subtle differences in the way the begats and sons are declared and exploits these differences to present a greatly expanded geneaology. As a result the author dates Adam to 11,000 B.C., the flood around 4990, tower of Babel around 3000, etc. I believe based on the common anchor point of the generally accepted date of the contruction of Solomon's temple. (it is this date which gives conventional scholars the 1447 B.C. date for the exodus.)

I personally, do not subscribe to this point of view, I present it as an example of how some people interpret the genealogies in a non-standard way.

Take a look and offer comments. Later I will point you to another online book (I hope its still online) that I believe to be an excellent example of biblical scholarship and takes a different view.

Enigma7457 wrote:i understand now what you meant. But it doesn't read that way. True, many genealogies in the bible simply say, so and so is the father (or ancester) of so and so. But look at the verses below:

Gen 5:3 "WHen Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likenes, in his own image; and he named him Seth...

Gen 5:6 "When Seth had lived 105 yeasr, he became the father of Enosh...

Gen 5:9 "When Enosh had loved 90 years, he became the father of Kenan..."

Now, i understand father and can mean ancester, but it says 130 years, 105 years, 90 years. So it doesn't matter. When Adam was 130, Seth was 0. When Seth was 105 (and Adam 235) Enosh was 0. When Enosh was 90 (and Adam 325, and Seth 195) Kenan was 0.

This trend continues from Adam all the way to Jacob. So we technically know (at the time Jacob is born) how many years ago Adam was born. I'm not past Jacob yet (can't find anymore genealogies with ages). But either way, Jacob moved to Egypt and the Isrealites lived there 400 years before they left. So if we know when they left egypt, we can backtrack to when Adam was formed.

Just a question Have you Cross Referenced Genesis to Chronicles? You will see some slight Differences...

Also Check Here for a good slideshow
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/sld001.php

I have just begun to cross check genesis with the matthew and luke genealogies and am already hitting problems. I will look into chronicles as well.

Will update some time soon.

Enigma, I am not sure of the problems you are seeing but be aware that one reason the NT genealogies are different is because an extra Cainan is added in the list of names. This is possibly due to the fact the NT authors were using a version of the LXX or Vorlage text pentateuch. The Christians, today use the Masoretic translation for our old testament. There are some fairly significant differences which can be explored in depth. Google: LXX Masoretic differences

thanks Monk. That was my problem. Been busy, but i will look into that more.

Enigma7457 wrote:However on another Side we also notice that "civilization" writings, crafts, etc... were in around the 10,000 to 6,000 range....

Hmmmmm

Thinga that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

If you are going to use scripture and produce a timeline I suggest you use the septuagent for the births of the line. The Torah was modified in 300 AD and the KJV had some of these changes. The Septuagent was written 280 BC from the original text so it does not contain the errors.

And you should use 400 years for the time in eqypt.

Try not to use any timelines other than scripture. I have looked into many of them and the errors are huge. Many people try and use the eqyptian timeline and try and force scripture into that timeline. The problem is many of the pharoahs were in a divided kingdom so it is not in a known sequence.

The timeline that I use has a creation date of approx 5700 BC. It is a great study to map out the timeline, I had a great time doing it.

frankbaginski wrote:If you are going to use scripture and produce a timeline I suggest you use the septuagent for the births of the line. The Torah was modified in 300 AD and the KJV had some of these changes. The Septuagent was written 280 BC from the original text so it does not contain the errors.

And you should use 400 years for the time in eqypt.

Try not to use any timelines other than scripture. I have looked into many of them and the errors are huge. Many people try and use the eqyptian timeline and try and force scripture into that timeline. The problem is many of the pharoahs were in a divided kingdom so it is not in a known sequence.

The timeline that I use has a creation date of approx 5700 BC. It is a great study to map out the timeline, I had a great time doing it.

YOU SEE THIS FELLOW DOESN'T KNOW ANYTHING AT LEAST THE BIBLE IS A GOD BREATHED BOOK AND THERE IS NO OTHR LIKE THAT IF HE SAY MAN WROTE IT YES MAN DID BUT THEY GOT THE KNOW HOW FROM GOD

The original text that was inspired by God has of course no errors. The search for the original text is interesting and a cross check with archaeology helps. The problem is opinions vary widely. Only recently with the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls do we have another critical piece to this puzzle.