Christian Forums

How can you possibly believe the dates Sciencist have put on the last ice age?  Or for that matter, the Bering Strait?
What's your answer?

Can you clarify what you are asking?

Quote from: admin on Tue Apr 01, 2008 - 17:32:12
Can you clarify what you are asking?

Sorry for the confusion, Lee.  I have developed an interest in the last ice age that we had and it seems that according to some Scientist it was about 17,000 years while others think it was between 9,000 and 50 plus thousands years ago.  This timeline doesn't agree with our account of Creation in Genesis.

The bridge made by the layers of ice that formed the Bering Strait is said to have been the way the first peoples made their way into the Americas. The dates believed for their migration is also older than the account of Creation.

I was just wondering what others believe on these subjects.

The Bible gives no date for creation or the age of the earth.

Quote from: admin on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 09:37:07
The Bible gives no date for creation or the age of the earth.

I must be messed up somewhere because I thought it was about 6,000 years ago that God created the earth and man.

The Bible doesn't say that. A Bishop claimed that at some point in the past but the Bible doesn't mention anything about the age of the earth or the Universe.

Quote from: admin on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 10:20:52
The Bible doesn't say that. A Bishop claimed that at some point in the past but the Bible doesn't mention anything about the age of the earth or the Universe.

Is it then possible that people crossed the Bering Strait 9,000 years ago coming to the Americas.
Any answers are appreciated.  I'm just trying to learn more nothing else.

Quote from: admin on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 09:37:07
The Bible gives no date for creation or the age of the earth.

I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 3,600 B.C.

Abraham entered Canaan when he was 75, (cf. Gen 12:4) so he would have been born roughly 2039 B.C.

Then the Exodus out of Egypt was 430 years after Abraham entered Canaan to the day (cf. Gen 12:10, Exodus 12:40, Gal 3:17) placing the Exodus 1964 B.C.

Then you have the construction of Solomon's Temple 480 years after the Exodus (cf. 1 Kings 6:1) nearly 1534 B.C.

From the end of Solomon's 40 year reign to the start of the Temple in the 4th year of his reign takes us back another 37 years to 1055 B.C.

Then considering the archaeological event of the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon in 588 B.C., and counting backwards the prophesied number of years between this event and the division of Solomon's kingdom (390 yrs. + 40 yrs., according to Ezekiel 4:4-7), brings us to 1018 B.C.

Daniel prophecies from that captivity in Babylon from a decree to rebuild Jerusalem there will be 62 weeks (483 years) to the coming of Messiah. Now I wont pretend to know what decree that was since there are 4 recorded in the Bible; but they only span 539-444 B.C. So we are only approximately looking at a century for a margin of error, hardly enough room to fit million and billions of years. This would finally place us about 100 B.C.-33 A.D.

---

I threw this together from a few different sources, I could take more time to fine turn this since I haven't mapped everything out picture perfect. But I think this give you a pretty good idea that there is ample information in the Bible to conclude the relative age of the earth.

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27

Quote from: admin on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 09:37:07
The Bible gives no date for creation or the age of the earth.

I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

Abraham entered Canaan when he was 75, (cf. Gen 12:4) so he would have been born roughly 2039 B.C.

Then the Exodus out of Egypt was 430 years after Abraham entered Canaan to the day (cf. Gen 12:10, Exodus 12:40, Gal 3:17) placing the Exodus 1964 B.C.

Then you have the construction of Solomon's Temple 480 years after the Exodus (cf. 1 Kings 6:1) nearly 1534 B.C.

From the end of Solomon's 40 year reign to the start of the Temple in the 4th year of his reign takes us back another 37 years to 1055 B.C.

Then considering the archaeological event of the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon in 588 B.C., and counting backwards the prophesied number of years between this event and the division of Solomon's kingdom (390 yrs. + 40 yrs., according to Ezekiel 4:4-7), brings us to 1018 B.C.

Daniel prophecies from that captivity in Babylon from a decree to rebuild Jerusalem there will be 62 weeks (483 years) to the coming of Messiah. Now I wont pretend to know what decree that was since there are 4 recorded in the Bible; but they only span 539-444 B.C. So we are only approximately looking at a century for a margin of error, hardly enough room to fit million and billions of years. This would finally place us about 100 B.C.-33 A.D.

---

I threw this together from a few different sources, I could take more time to fine turn this since I haven't mapped everything out picture perfect. But I think this give you a pretty good idea that there is ample information in the Bible to conclude the relative age of the earth.

This account  then does not correspond with biblical history -

Scholars who follow the Bering Strait theory agree that most indigenous peoples of the Americas descended from people who probably migrated from Siberia across the Bering Strait, anywhere between 9,000 and 50,000 years ago. The timeframe and exact routes are still matters of debate, and the model faces continuous challenges.

Quote from: Bonnie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:47:25
This account  then does not correspond with biblical history -

Scholars who follow the Bering Strait theory agree that most indigenous peoples of the Americas descended from people who probably migrated from Siberia across the Bering Strait, anywhere between 9,000 and 50,000 years ago. The timeframe and exact routes are still matters of debate, and the model faces continuous challenges.

What "scientific" theories do correspond with what God says?

I think most migration happened before the time of Peleg (cf. Gen 10:25), and that shortly after the division was caused by rising sea levels as the earth changed after the flood. If you are interested in this subject there are some great videos on young earth creationism done by Kent Hovind.

Just click the links for the seminars and the videos open right on the page.

http://freehovind.com/watch

Or you can download them from his site:

http://www.drdino.com/downloads.php?type=Seminar+Video

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

Bishop Ussher dated creation at October of 4004 BC. I can't remember the exact date, but it all started on a Sunday (ironic, since the Sun wasn't even created until that Wednesday).

I wonder what time Friday God ended his work. Did he knock off early or put in all eight?

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

I think that was a typo.

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 12:00:14

Quote from: Bonnie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:47:25
This account  then does not correspond with biblical history -

Scholars who follow the Bering Strait theory agree that most indigenous peoples of the Americas descended from people who probably migrated from Siberia across the Bering Strait, anywhere between 9,000 and 50,000 years ago. The timeframe and exact routes are still matters of debate, and the model faces continuous challenges.

What "scientific" theories do correspond with what God says?

I think most migration happened before the time of Peleg (cf. Gen 10:25), and that shortly after the division was caused by rising sea levels as the earth changed after the flood. If you are interested in this subject there are some great videos on young earth creationism done by Kent Hovind.

Just click the links for the seminars and the videos open right on the page.

http://freehovind.com/watch

Or you can download them from his site:

http://www.drdino.com/downloads.php?type=Seminar+Video

I have bookmarked the site.
Thanks, Charles.

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:11:27
Bishop Ussher dated creation at October of 4004 BC. I can't remember the exact date, but it all started on a Sunday (ironic, since the Sun wasn't even created until that Wednesday).

I wonder what time Friday God ended his work. Did he knock off early or put in all eight?

This I haven't heard of before.

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

The way these suppositional histories are put together, it might as well have.

The Bible's not a magic 8-ball.  You can't just go looking in it to find the answer to every question you have; there are some things it just doesn't concern itself with.

Quote from: marc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:09:58

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

The way these suppositional histories are put together, it might as well have.

The Bible's not a magic 8-ball.  You can't just go looking in it to find the answer to every question you have; there are some things it just doesn't concern itself with.

Based upon what we've been taught when do you believe America first become inhabited?

Quote from: Bonnie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:34:00

Quote from: marc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:09:58

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

The way these suppositional histories are put together, it might as well have.

The Bible's not a magic 8-ball.  You can't just go looking in it to find the answer to every question you have; there are some things it just doesn't concern itself with.

Based upon what we've been taught when do you believe America first become inhabited?

When early Siberians wandered across the land bridge connecting the Bering Strait, just as you said previously.

Quote from: mike on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 18:08:28

Quote from: Bonnie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:34:00

Quote from: marc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:09:58

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

The way these suppositional histories are put together, it might as well have.

The Bible's not a magic 8-ball.  You can't just go looking in it to find the answer to every question you have; there are some things it just doesn't concern itself with.

Based upon what we've been taught when do you believe America first become inhabited?

When early Siberians wandered across the land bridge connecting the Bering Strait, just as you said previously.

Mike, the dates are all wrong.  I suppose they could be right about the people crossing over and wrong about the dates.   

Quote from: Bonnie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 18:21:54

Quote from: mike on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 18:08:28

Quote from: Bonnie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:34:00

Quote from: marc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:09:58

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

The way these suppositional histories are put together, it might as well have.

The Bible's not a magic 8-ball.  You can't just go looking in it to find the answer to every question you have; there are some things it just doesn't concern itself with.

Based upon what we've been taught when do you believe America first become inhabited?

When early Siberians wandered across the land bridge connecting the Bering Strait, just as you said previously.

Mike, the dates are all wrong.  I suppose they could be right about the people crossing over and wrong about the dates.  

Bonnie,
There appears to be some disagreement about the dates, to be sure. I am unclear from reading the thread who you think has the wrong dates.

The Scientist of course.

Quote from: Bonnie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 18:34:46
The Scientist of course.

I see.

The data I have seen suggests that the land "bridge" (a misnomer, for it was hundreds of miles wide) was last submerged about 13,000 years ago. But it may have been present for 20,000 years or more, so people could have crossed over any time during that period.

Quote from: mike on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 18:45:43

Quote from: Bonnie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 18:34:46
The Scientist of course.

I see.

The data I have seen suggests that the land "bridge" (a misnomer, for it was hundreds of miles wide) was last submerged about 13,000 years ago. But it may have been present for 20,000 years or more, so people could have crossed over any time during that period.

I guess it's panning out as one of those puzzles in life we can't put together.
Thanks for your input.

Quote from: marc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:09:58

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

The way these suppositional histories are put together, it might as well have.

The Bible's not a magic 8-ball.  You can't just go looking in it to find the answer to every question you have; there are some things it just doesn't concern itself with.

I never heard the magic 8-ball quip before, where'd you hear that; Rob's newest book?

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 20:06:30

Quote from: marc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:09:58

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

The way these suppositional histories are put together, it might as well have.

The Bible's not a magic 8-ball.  You can't just go looking in it to find the answer to every question you have; there are some things it just doesn't concern itself with.

I never heard the magic 8-ball quip before, where'd you hear that; Rob's newest book?

I think it was from Todd's latest book.

Quote from: Gary on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 21:19:20

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 20:06:30

Quote from: marc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 17:09:58

Quote from: charlie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 14:01:58

Quote from: Charles Sloan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 - 11:24:27
I disagree.

The Bible is clear that after the fall from Adam to Noah is about 1,656 (cf. Gen 5:3-32) that would place creation at about 4,000 B.C.

Then from Noah's grandson Arphaxad (born 2 years after the flood)to Abraham is another 290 years (cf. Gen 11:11-26) placing the flood at 4,400 B.C.

So, lemme get this straight: the flood happened 400 years BEFORE creation?

The way these suppositional histories are put together, it might as well have.

The Bible's not a magic 8-ball.  You can't just go looking in it to find the answer to every question you have; there are some things it just doesn't concern itself with.

I never heard the magic 8-ball quip before, where'd you hear that; Rob's newest book?

I think it was from Todd's latest book.

I'm pretty sure thats not Todd Friel...

For a little balance, the scientific perspective:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

Also, one might note that the dates given for the length of life are significantly different in the Greek manuscripts of the LXX, than they are in the Hebrew Masoretic manuscripts that most English Bibles translate from.

There's a difference of a thousand years or so in there.

Jarrod

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 17:12:06
For a little balance, the scientific perspective:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

Also, one might note that the dates given for the length of life are significantly different in the Greek manuscripts of the LXX, than they are in the Hebrew Masoretic manuscripts that most English Bibles translate from.

There's a difference of a thousand years or so in there.

Jarrod

Thanks, Jarrod, I've done quite a bit of reading at Wikipedia but didn't see this.
I heard several years ago that we are due another Ice Age.  Do you agree with that?

Quote from: Bonnie on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 17:38:24

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 17:12:06
For a little balance, the scientific perspective:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

Also, one might note that the dates given for the length of life are significantly different in the Greek manuscripts of the LXX, than they are in the Hebrew Masoretic manuscripts that most English Bibles translate from.

There's a difference of a thousand years or so in there.

Jarrod

Thanks, Jarrod, I've done quite a bit of reading at Wikipedia but didn't see this.
I heard several years ago that we are due another Ice Age.  Do you agree with that?

I know enough to know that I don't know enough to say one way or the other. 

Although, I read a fascinating book recently about all the various ways that mankind could be destroyed.  Supervolcanoes, meteor impact, too much solar activity, not enough solar activity, nuclear war, super-germs, etc.

I'm going to agree with Jonathan Edwards on this one:

The reason why they are not fallen already, and don't fall now, is only that God's appointed time is not come.

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 18:12:10

Quote from: Bonnie on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 17:38:24

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 17:12:06
For a little balance, the scientific perspective:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

Also, one might note that the dates given for the length of life are significantly different in the Greek manuscripts of the LXX, than they are in the Hebrew Masoretic manuscripts that most English Bibles translate from.

There's a difference of a thousand years or so in there.

Jarrod

Thanks, Jarrod, I've done quite a bit of reading at Wikipedia but didn't see this.
I heard several years ago that we are due another Ice Age.  Do you agree with that?

I know enough to know that I don't know enough to say one way or the other. 

Although, I read a fascinating book recently about all the various ways that mankind could be destroyed.  Supervolcanoes, meteor impact, too much solar activity, not enough solar activity, nuclear war, super-germs, etc.

I'm going to agree with Jonathan Edwards on this one:

The reason why they are not fallen already, and don't fall now, is only that God's appointed time is not come.

lol  wise man!

It would seem to me that Globable Warming would fit if indeed we are in the End Times. All through history God has used natural forces to bring about His designs.

If you could back using all the geneologies in the Bible, I think you get about 3600 years.  I am not sure about all the other numbers Charles used, but I added up the years given in geneologies and got about 3600.  That was up until Christ.

In Christ,
KP

Quote from: k-pappy on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 21:41:17
If you could back using all the geneologies in the Bible, I think you get about 3600 years.  I am not sure about all the other numbers Charles used, but I added up the years given in geneologies and got about 3600.  That was up until Christ.

In Christ,
KP

The following has been shamelessly stolen from another internet forum:

       ...the genealogies of the Masoretic text and the LXX are very similar. The only significant difference between the MS and the LXX on Genesis 5 is that the LXX has 753 years for Lamech's life span while the MS has 777.

      The other difference is that the LXX adds 100 years to the life of some of the fathers when they had their sons. For example, the LXX has Adam having Seth at age 230 while the MS says it was at 130. But to make up for the difference, the LXX shaves off 100 years from the rest of the life of Adam, saying that Adam lived 700 years more, while the MS says he lived 800 years more. Hence, both the MS and LXX say Adam lived a total of 930 years (MS: 130 + 800 = 930; LXX: 230 + 700 = 930).

      The LXX adds 100 years to Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Enoch, but not Jared, Lamech or Noah. Except in the case of Lamech (noted above) the LXX shaves off what it added to the MS.

      As for Genesis 11, the LXX adds 100 years to Arphaxad, Salach, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, but not Shem or Nahor.

      But there are a few more discrepancies that are not in the Genesis 5 genealogy. The LXX adds Cainan between Arphaxad and Selach, but which is also recorded in Luke 3:36.

      Also, there is a great disparity between the life spans. Arphaxad, Salach, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor all have greater life spans in the LXX by about 30 to 154 years. But the LXX has a shorter life span than the MS for Eber by 60 years.

      All in all, the only place where we would get a slightly different total length of time for the genealogies is Genesis 11, and there the LXX has 3,976 years but the MS has 2,996 years, for a total of 980 years, but the bulk of that comes from Cainan who adds 460 years to the LXX genealogy that is not in the MS genealogy.

      This would mean that, if, without exception, the genealogies are father-son relationships, the creation of Adam could extend to around 4800-5000 BC, as opposed to the 4000 BC of the MS.

      But if the genealogies (except for the five realationships that are specified as father-son) are ancestral relationships wherein the ancestor is the calendar marker until the birth of the next-in-line, then we could go as high as 12,000 BC for the creation of Adam according to the LXX.

Hi K-P, thanks for the information.

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 23:35:02

Quote from: k-pappy on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 21:41:17
If you could back using all the geneologies in the Bible, I think you get about 3600 years.  I am not sure about all the other numbers Charles used, but I added up the years given in geneologies and got about 3600.  That was up until Christ.

In Christ,
KP

The following has been shamelessly stolen from another internet forum:

       ...the genealogies of the Masoretic text and the LXX are very similar. The only significant difference between the MS and the LXX on Genesis 5 is that the LXX has 753 years for Lamech's life span while the MS has 777.

      The other difference is that the LXX adds 100 years to the life of some of the fathers when they had their sons. For example, the LXX has Adam having Seth at age 230 while the MS says it was at 130. But to make up for the difference, the LXX shaves off 100 years from the rest of the life of Adam, saying that Adam lived 700 years more, while the MS says he lived 800 years more. Hence, both the MS and LXX say Adam lived a total of 930 years (MS: 130 + 800 = 930; LXX: 230 + 700 = 930).

      The LXX adds 100 years to Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Enoch, but not Jared, Lamech or Noah. Except in the case of Lamech (noted above) the LXX shaves off what it added to the MS.

      As for Genesis 11, the LXX adds 100 years to Arphaxad, Salach, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, but not Shem or Nahor.

      But there are a few more discrepancies that are not in the Genesis 5 genealogy. The LXX adds Cainan between Arphaxad and Selach, but which is also recorded in Luke 3:36.

      Also, there is a great disparity between the life spans. Arphaxad, Salach, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor all have greater life spans in the LXX by about 30 to 154 years. But the LXX has a shorter life span than the MS for Eber by 60 years.

      All in all, the only place where we would get a slightly different total length of time for the genealogies is Genesis 11, and there the LXX has 3,976 years but the MS has 2,996 years, for a total of 980 years, but the bulk of that comes from Cainan who adds 460 years to the LXX genealogy that is not in the MS genealogy.

      This would mean that, if, without exception, the genealogies are father-son relationships, the creation of Adam could extend to around 4800-5000 BC, as opposed to the 4000 BC of the MS.

      But if the genealogies (except for the five realationships that are specified as father-son) are ancestral relationships wherein the ancestor is the calendar marker until the birth of the next-in-line, then we could go as high as 12,000 BC for the creation of Adam according to the LXX.

Jarrod, you amaze me with all the info you're able to come up with on just about any subject.
That date would work or at least I think it would as to when the first peoples came to the Americas across the Bering Strait.

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 23:35:02

Quote from: k-pappy on Thu Apr 03, 2008 - 21:41:17
If you could back using all the geneologies in the Bible, I think you get about 3600 years.  I am not sure about all the other numbers Charles used, but I added up the years given in geneologies and got about 3600.  That was up until Christ.

In Christ,
KP

The following has been shamelessly stolen from another internet forum:

       ...the genealogies of the Masoretic text and the LXX are very similar. The only significant difference between the MS and the LXX on Genesis 5 is that the LXX has 753 years for Lamech's life span while the MS has 777.

      The other difference is that the LXX adds 100 years to the life of some of the fathers when they had their sons. For example, the LXX has Adam having Seth at age 230 while the MS says it was at 130. But to make up for the difference, the LXX shaves off 100 years from the rest of the life of Adam, saying that Adam lived 700 years more, while the MS says he lived 800 years more. Hence, both the MS and LXX say Adam lived a total of 930 years (MS: 130 + 800 = 930; LXX: 230 + 700 = 930).

      The LXX adds 100 years to Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Enoch, but not Jared, Lamech or Noah. Except in the case of Lamech (noted above) the LXX shaves off what it added to the MS.

      As for Genesis 11, the LXX adds 100 years to Arphaxad, Salach, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, but not Shem or Nahor.

      But there are a few more discrepancies that are not in the Genesis 5 genealogy. The LXX adds Cainan between Arphaxad and Selach, but which is also recorded in Luke 3:36.

      Also, there is a great disparity between the life spans. Arphaxad, Salach, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor all have greater life spans in the LXX by about 30 to 154 years. But the LXX has a shorter life span than the MS for Eber by 60 years.

      All in all, the only place where we would get a slightly different total length of time for the genealogies is Genesis 11, and there the LXX has 3,976 years but the MS has 2,996 years, for a total of 980 years, but the bulk of that comes from Cainan who adds 460 years to the LXX genealogy that is not in the MS genealogy.

      This would mean that, if, without exception, the genealogies are father-son relationships, the creation of Adam could extend to around 4800-5000 BC, as opposed to the 4000 BC of the MS.

      But if the genealogies (except for the five realationships that are specified as father-son) are ancestral relationships wherein the ancestor is the calendar marker until the birth of the next-in-line, then we could go as high as 12,000 BC for the creation of Adam according to the LXX.

You know, when I hit quote, I can actually read it as it appears in the little blue box!  Otherwise, my eyes fail me.

I expect there's so much about all this that we don't understand.