The timeline of the Bible

In msg 107 you wrote: While you are concerned about "off topic" -I thought that the discussion was on the timeline of the Bible.
Perhaps you wish to change it to "the Timeline of Various Hebrew Apochryphal Books".Jasher was not included in the Hebrew canon, as interesting as it may be.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I didn't notice any passage "threatening" eternal damnation because someone scratched their head at some of the geneological information, trying to add up years.If you take the book "seriously" could you point out these threats?Where is the demand or command to not question geneological information in the Bible upon pain of eternal damnation?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I don't think I missed your point. I think some kind of bitterness in you is coming through in your sarcastic and exagerated caricature of divine judgment and salvation.IE. in essence you are saying - "God is so harsh, that if I don't blindly accept these numbers as part and partial of believing the Bible, I am threatened with eternal damnation." This to me is not a "hint". This is somewhat a change in the subject matter altogether.Now you are complaining, ie. in essence, "Geneological puzzles have little to do with it. God is eager to damn those who never heard of your god."I don't agree with that premise, mainly because of what I read in the Bible itself. It is really another topic. And I suspect that to persue it will win the "Off Topic" flag.But let me ask you this. If I could show you why I believe, from Scripture, something perhaps radical in evangelical circles, ... if I could show you that some people will live forever who were not "born again" would that have any effect on your attitude of the "too harsh, too eager to damn" God ?Now my little hint to you:The book of Revelation says that the sons of God (born of God) will reign forever and ever (Rev.21:7;22:5).Now it is unlikely that this means that they reign forever over each other. So who are those over whom these sons of God reign for eternity ? Think on it. Maybe I'll give you some other hints.But if not or you don't give a hoot one way or another,... (more to topic of the thread,) yes, there are some years left out in the accounting in some passages.A book entitled Number in the Scripture by one E.W. Bullinger, deals with this matter. Often God's accounting of years are according to His priorities. If there are some years apparently dropped, some of us ask the question "Why were these years not accounted for?"In many cases that yields to some insightful answers. That is theories of why, in the Bible, God omitted some years of certain people in the divine accounting. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I don't play dumb. Some people are going to be punished in eternal perdition.But neither should you play a fickle Judge who is totally unreasonable wanting "blind" following.You are attempting to make Jesus into Baal. I am up to your challenge on the matter of the so-called "ignorant of God" complaint.If you want to open up a topic "Is God Eager to Damn the Ignorant?" we can discuss it. It is somewhat different from the Timeline matter.I will nicely not play dumb. I am not doing so now. But I didn't allow your exagerated caricature to pass without a question of "Where is That?" I note that you didn't show us where. That's a start, I think.

I see. However your wrote this: Answer: We know because of all the "motives" of God in the Bible this is never mentioned as one.I asked you for evidence of it being a motive and you have none.Now if you want to make up stuff and say "Aha. Here is God's motive" That's your problem. Isn't it?Some of us intend to discover "motive" of the Divine Will by examining the Divine words.Other comment, I'll respond to latter.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Another comment on this: 1.) Many of us don' acccept your characterization of the Bible as "poorly constructed, self-contradictory book".There may be some paradoxes and even some apparent contradictions. What long book doesn't have some ?I don't think it is poorly contructed.2.) I don't think walking by faith and not by sight is "blind" following. It is percieving that there are realities more substantial than what the five senses can detect.3.) God doesn't "test" people to ek out what they have in their natural being. He knows that the Adamic fallen nature is a failure at its best. There is no need to "test" it.He may raise up or allow you to fall into circumstances which press you to depend upon God.4.) The whole "fickle tyrant" suspicion of God, is to me, kind of sick.

For motives of God, I look for His declaration of what those motives are. No need to second guess. There is just the need to search out and find what God says about His motives in the Bible.That would include the revelation conveyed by the apostles and prophets.Wouldn't there be plenty of disclosure about the motives of God in the teachings of Jesus the Son of God ? Sure there would be.But if you have a problem believing that Christ is Son of God or is speaking for God, then you might fall back into the dispair of second guessing the Divine motives.Maybe the problem is your side. Why don't you take what God says about His motives at face value? Why complain that no one knows the motives of God when God has stated the intention of His will in both Old and New Testaments?

That was a instance to which I was refering. I spoke generally not to that particular example which I would have to study. However here is an example of omitted generations in the biblcal counting."Thus all the generations from Abraham until David are fourteen generations, and from David until the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon until the Christ, fourteen generations." (Matthew 1:13)Three units of fourteen generations writes Matthew.Some Bible students inquire as to generations which were skipped. This geneology is divided into three ages of 14 generations each. That is 3 x 14 = 42 generations. However according to history it should be 45 generations."Why were certain generations skipped in the counting?" is the question some Bible students ask. And why does it appear that the numbers are munipulated to arrive at three ages of 14 generations each to make 42 generations?The geneology records that "Joram begot Uzziah". However, 1 Chronicles 3:11-21 says "Joram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son, Amaziah his son, Azariah". Azariah is Uzziah (2 Kings 15:1,13). Three generations - Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah were omitted. Some teachers explain that this skipped in Matthew's counting was due to the evil marriage of Joram and the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, which corrupted Joram's descendents (2 Chronicles 21:5-6; 22:1-4). In accordance with Exodus 20:5, three generations of Joram's descendents were cut off from the geneology of Christ.The geneology of Matthew records that "Josiah begot Jeconiah". However, 1 Chronicles 3:15-16 says "The sons of Josiah ... the second Jehoiakim ... and the son of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son." One generation, that of Jehoiakim, was omitted from Matthew's geneology of Christ. This must have been because Jehoiakim was made king by Pharoah of Egypt and collected taxes for Pharoah (2 Kings 23:34-35).These two examples of skips suggest the God inspired counting to be done according to His priorities at times rather than typical human sense of history.Some Bible teachers mention that Jeconiah was not reckoned as a king in Matthew's geneology, because he was born during the captivity and was a captive (2 Chron. 36:9-10). Jehoiakim is Jeconiah.Matthew 1:12 says " ... Jeconiah begot Salathiel, and Salathiel begot Zerubbabel." But compare this to the record of 1 Chronicles 3:17-19 which says "The sons of Jeconiah ... Shealtiel [i.e. Salathiel] ... and Pedaiah ... and the sons of Pedaiah were Zerubbabel." The passage shows that Zerubbabel was the son of Pedaiah, Salathiel's brother. Zerubbabel was not Salathiel's son but was his nephew, and he became his heir. Perhaps this was a case in accordance with Deut. 25:5-6.Anway historically there were actually 45 generations Matthew spans. By deducting from these generations three cursed generations and one improper generation, and then adding David one by making David to close one generation and open another, thus making two generations related to him, the generation total to 42 divided into three ages of 14 generations each.Probably David, as a strong type of Christ, is listed as terminating one age and initiating another. David terminates the age before the establishment of the kingdom of Israel, and initiates the kingdom age. That must be as a kingdom according to God's desire. In other words David "turns" the age. Christ as David's anti-type also "turns" the age - ending one age and bringing in a new one.The number 40 in the Bible is often associated with trials, temptations, and sufferings (Heb. 3:9; Matt. 4:2; i Kings 19:8). Forty two signifies rest and satisfaction after trial. The children of Israel traveled through 42 stations before they entered the good land of rest. The millennial kingdom as a rest will come after the 42 months of the great tribulation in Revelation 13:4. The spiritual meaning of Matthew's 42 generations to Christ's birth may signal then that Christ came as the forty-second generation to be the rest and satisfaction of God's people.The main point here is that the Holy Spirit in conveying to us God's word, counts the generations according to Divine priorities of times. So where some may see "mistakes" it might occur to them that they are mistaken in not seeing the counting through the eyes of God according to God's accounting - time based on His priorities.You called Matthew's geneology a "scam". I don't see it as a scam. I want to hear from some other Bible students on why there would be some adjustment in the counting, and if it should shed light on God's priorities or spiritual lessons for us.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I mentioned Bullinger's book assuming interested parties would go read a more exhaustive discussion of numbers in the Bible.Here is one of his examples of accounting of time durations from the viewpoint of God's priorities:He writes that God dealings with His people have to do with actual duration of time rather than wth specific dates. He sees great symbolic divisions of Israel's history as the times of God's dealing with them and marked with the same number. If we we confine ourselves to duration of years rather than the sucession of years and chronological dates some biblcal difficulties are solved.He finds God's dealing with Israel can be measured out into four periods, each consisting of 490 (70 times 7) years.The 1rst - From Abraham to the Exodus.
The 2nd - The Exodus to the Dedication of the Temple.
The 3rd - From the Temple to Nehemiah's from Babylon.
The 4th - From Nehiamiah to the Second Coming of Christ.I will only write something here about two of these 490 year periods for space sake. Some years when the Israelites were not immediately governed over by God and His hand was removed, are deducted "and His people were without visible tokens of His presence with them."From the birth of Abraham to the Exodus was actually (Gen. 12:4; 16:3; and 22:5) 505 years. But Bullinger sees each of the four epochs as consisting of 490 years each. By deducting 15 years while Ishmael was Abram's seed according to Abram and Sarai's plot, delaying the promised seed of God, you get (505 - 15) = 490 years. From the Exodus to the foundation of the Temple, according to Acts 13:20 - "And after these things, for about four hundred and fifty years, He gave them judges until Samuel the prophet."But the Israelites were:In the Wilderness - 40 years.
Under the Judges - 450 years.
Under Saul - 40 years.
Under David - 40 years.
to Solomon's temple - 3 years.(40 + 450 + 40 + 40 + 3) = 573 years. The Captivities of the Israelites should be deducted from the time of the Judges:These are under Cushan (Judges 3:8) - 8 years
Under Eglon (Judges 3:14) - 18 years
Under Jabin (Judges 4:3) - 20 years
Under Midianities (Judges 6:1) - 7 years
Under Philistines (Judges 13:1) - 40 years(8 + 18 + 20 + 7 + 40 ) = 93 years.490 years of the second epoch minus 93 years = 480 years. But we look for an additional 10 to make the theorized 490 year epoch.We must add the years during which the Temple was in building, for the finishing of the house (i Kings 6:38) - 7 years.
We must add at least for the furnishing and ending of all the work (1 Kings 7:13-51) - 3 years.(480 + 7 + 3) = 490 years.The two examples of the (7 x 70) = 490 years of the first two great divisions of Bullinger's 490 durations of God's dealing with His people Israel.J.N. Darby has a note on issue of Acts 12:20: Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

In the course of this discussion Matthew's geneology has been discussed also.I did not promise you that I would only use your favorite section of Scriptures to talk about timelines. I said I would give examples of skipped time in biblical accounting.My point is made regardless of your dismissal of it as being "irrelevant." Maybe I do. Maybe I do not.If you examine what I said that I could provide you, there was no self imposed restriction or accepted limitation to only deal with Adam to Noah in Genesis. I told you that that I would have to study. I gave you examples as I said I would do.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

To tell the truth, I haven't considered it that much.I gathered that a major reason for this debate has to do with the assumption that the Bible says the age of the universe is 6,000 years old.I do not believe that the Bible allows us only to understand a 6,000 year old universe. But the logic that I would imploy to show that is not geneological.To the point of the age of the universe, the geneology of Adam is not that important to me. What is important to me is that the Bible does have some intervals in timeline, skipped generations being only one instance of that as demonstrated above in Matthew.

I can understand that you only want people to defend perhaps some favored strawman of yours.But my post contributes to the whole issue of timeline in the Bible.
If you get nothing from it, someone else might. I don't have to defend Ussher's way of pinpointing when creation occured.Make a complaint with the moderators if you think no Bible readers should contribute to this discussion except they be here to defend Ussher's timeline.I'd rather post something "irrelevant" (as seen by you) but would help some readers to see why your little pet peeve about Ussher's geneological calculations is no final blow to the Christian's concept of when creation occured. I discussed the concept of timeline in the Bible.You're not the god of which way these threads turn and wind.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

"In the beginning." You just told me: I talked about biblical timelines. Sometimes God ommited generations. And God records time for us often according to His priorities.That's my input right now. Others may find it a useful contribution though you don't. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Well that's what Rrhain says.The assumption is that everything about the history of the universe has to be in ONE PLACE in the Bible. If it is not all in Genesis it is not relevant. That's the position.But everything about the history of the universe is not all in Genesis. And the first glimps in Genesis we see of anything created is in a state of waste and void.Something was destroyed. How long it lay like that we are not told.

You don't know how long ago "the beginning" was. If you claim that you do, many ancient readers of the Hebrew text would not agree with you. Many Christians do not agree either.It is not necessary to claim a "Day Age" interpretation to recognize that you don't know. Even when the 7 days of Genesis 1 are typical 24 hour days, you still don't know when "the beginning" was. I also talked about accounting of time from the Divine viewpoint with Divine priorities.I demonstrated the same with Matthew's geneology and with years dropped from the time the Jews were under foreigners in the days of the Judges.Taking the book of Genesis, the first calling of Abraham is not recorded. What is recorded in terms of Abraham's being called by God is his calling after he had been removed from Ur of the Chaldeas and settled temporarily in Haran. The previous calling of Abraham by God is indicated in the book of Acts and is not mentioned in Genesis.So you do not have all the historical events concerning God's calling of Abraham in Genesis. Neither do you have all of the historical events related to God's creation of the universe in Genesis.My reasons for saying this are not primarily geneological. And another thread could be opened for that and has in the past. But the point of assuming that you can pinpoint the year of creation is relevant to this thread. What helps some of us to realize that the Divine viewpoint according to Divine priorities will omit spans of time. I haven't studied it. I don't know. I do know that spans of real time are sometimes omitted in the biblcal record because the Holy Spirit speak through the writers of time according to God's plans and God's priorities. Whatever it says, the point remains that some places in Scripture record time not according to exhaustive secular mathematical precision but according to God's accounting of time that COUNTED in to His plans.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.