Calendar Patriarchs

Isn't there more than one translation that is refered to as the septuagint. If I remember correctly, the original rabbi's supposedly only did the Torah, yet versions of the septuagint exist that cover the prophets and the writings too.

yes, i admit, this creates problems for your view where the bible skips people. why not skip peleg? because the bible doesn't skip people in genealogies. they are concerned with a direct lineage. because peleg's lifetime is more specific. besides, peleg means "division." it's not a coincidence. yes, i've done the math. but i have a better question:why mention eber at all? why mention salah? why mention arpaxad? why mention shem? afterall, noah was still alive when peleg was born, and the world was divided. noah lived for about 100 years after that, too. why not just say noah begat peleg?

---

and the apocyrpha, i believe. i could be wrong on that though.i'm not sure if it was all done at once. probably not.

---

same thing.

Ok, then. Back to the topic ^. I've suggested why already. Because they were not direct fathers and sons. I dont know about the septuagint translations. But Im sure their translations aren't the actual bible. Like for example, we have the KJV, and the NIV. They are way different.

no, that's not why. that's why not. why mention anyone in particular? why not just say that noah begat peleg? or noah begat abraham, and skip this whole mess? the point i'm trying to make is this:if they are not a direct lineage, what factors discriminate between people who are mentioned, and people who are not mentioned? got a real bound copy of the NIV translation handy? read the introduction. the NIV is primarily based on the masoretic text (like the KJV), but it consults the septuagint, the dead sea scrolls, the targumim, and a number of other versions quite regularly. i assure you, the septuagint is really the bible. not only is it really the bible, it's the oldest complete old testament, and the oldest version of many of the books therein. and it is almost certainly the old testament that luke copied his genealogy from.Edited by arachnophilia, : typo, grammar

---

No, it's not. If the primary concern were to give a date then it wouldn't be so vague. Secondly the whole argument on "calendar patriarchs" is based on the assumption that the only concern is to give a date and ignores the whole issue of Peleg's name. When it is understood that the reason for mentioning Peleg is to explain his name the argument collapses.-->http://

i disagree. the only vaguery is when specifically in peleg's life it happened, but by simple logic it must have been before he was named. that gives us a period of, well, 8 days.dates in ancient mesopotamia, in the bible and elsewhere, are usually given by saying "in the year X of such-such-a-king's reign..." since there are no kings (or even nations) yet, this would be how it's done.in the bible, genealogies are as much a record of time's passage as they are who gave birth to whom. there simply is no other system. this passage is, yes, explaining where peleg got his name; but who the hell is peleg? he's not a notable character otherwise. we have no stories about him. the only reason he's important at all is his association with babel. a fair portion of my objection to crue knight's point is that his take betrays the date-keeping functionality of the genealogies. you can, indeed, count years with them. this may have been their secondary purpose, but it does seem to have been intended. ok, and why is his name explained? because it's mentioned? he's associated with the event at the tower of babel, and associated in the genealogies. we're told that:

quote:

---

‘ —’

​

ki b'yomio n'pelegah ha-eretz

​

because in his days the earth was divided

---

not just because but when as well. the verse serves both meanings.

---

Had a look at that link and perused 'Evolution`s Absurdities'. He trots out that old wooly mammoth--Smokescreen no. 5--AFD (Argument from Design). A table? Surely he can find a better example? Hope the rest of his stuff is a tad better argued than that.

quote:

---

i disagree. the only vaguery is when specifically in peleg's life it happened, but by simple logic it must have been before he was named. that gives us a period of, well, 8 days.

---

More accurately that it was still going on at the time he was named - but the process of dividing could have taken years. And we only have to look at the imaginative readings of this passage that have been proposed to work out that it isn't so very clear. It's quite hard to understand without the context of the Babel story, and the links aren't immediately obvious.

oh, i hadn't even thought of that.

quote:

---

About thirteen years ago, I wrote the book entitled 1994?. In it, I set forth a great amount of information derived solely from the Bible that suggested very strongly that there was a high likelihood that the world would come to an end sometime in the year A.D. 1994. Of course, the world did not end, and now, eleven years later, the world is still here.

---

oops!it's one of those cults. hey, guess what, i could have saved him all the trouble in the world:

quote:

---

Mat 25:13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

---

quote:

---

1Th 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night

---

quote:

---

2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night;

---

funny these verses were never mentioned... while where at it.

quote:

---

1Ti 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.

---

quote:

---

Tts 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

---

---

Like I said, they were "calendar patriarchs". What is that? They are people listed in the bible as a calendar.So why were Eber and the others mentioned? Because they represented a calendar. Peleg was born around the time Eber died. So actually you're right in a sence, why did God mentioned, so and so? God didnt mention anyone born between Eber and Peleg...and some others. Possibly a few generations could have been between them.For ex: If your great-grandfather was still living, (and you were being mentioned in the Bible as a calendar) then your father and grandfather wouldn't be mentioned. If you died before your great-grandfather, you son would probably be mentioned, and not you.

Wow, ur fast in reading a large sized book to say, "NEVER MENTIONED".Yes, the bible say he will come as a theif, but thats not all...read on... Also... Basically, God is encouraging the study of the end of time.
You just cant read one sentence and think it's all done.
God was talking to the unbelievers. But the believers will search for the time of the end.
And Mr. Camping said 1994? (Note the "?"). But it wasn't all in vain. He figured 1994 was and important date. It was a jubilee year. But that is a different topic.

no. genealogy was far, far more important to the ancient hebrews than keeping track of time. they are there to keep track of who came from whom, and how. not to keep track of time. keeping track of time is a secondary benefit.and actually, by your view, it's not useful for that at all, is it? because we can arbitrarily re-define when people had kids.

quote:

---

Gen 11:16 And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg:

---

eber lived 34 years, and fathered peleg.

quote:

---

Gen 11:17 And Eber lived after he begat Peleg four hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters.

---

after peleg was born, eber lived another 430 years. i really don't know how you can read this any other way. it's rather plain english. it's rather plain hebrew, too. because peleg is eber's child. as in direct child. you can use ben to descibe people further down the line, but not yelad. except that is says someone is the father, and that he continues to live AFTER the son is born. your point, at this point, is directly contradicting the text. these are not complex verses.

---

hit ctrl+f. that's called "search."

quote:

---

4 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.
5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.
6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.

---

he's saying "be prepared, because you don't know when it's coming." unlike others, we know that it is coming, but we do not know when. to say we do removes the logical premise of jesus's argument. if we know when the theif in the night is coming, we can just set our alarms, go to sleep, and wake up in time to stop him. or better yet, just call the police.if we know when god is coming, why not live in sin, and repent right before he shows up? jesus is saying "live everyday like it's the last." no, god is saying don't bother with end-time prophecy, rather be prepared for it everyday. the great thing about doomsdayers is that so far, every single last one of them has been wrong. some of them quite a few times.

---