Calendar Patriarchs

Could the division of the earth be farther than what we think to the flood (possibly about 2,000yrs. (4990 B.C. - 3114 B.C.) NOT 6-7000yrs old)?We read Gen 11 and think the time from the flood to the division of the earth was about 101 yrs. But notice the Bible doesn't use the phrase "called his name". So is it possible Eber was NOT Peleg's direct father?Let's look at Gen 8:13

quote:

---

And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the earth: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dry.

---

And Gen 6:7 says:

quote:

---

And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.

---

Does it mean the calendar of the Bible could be tied with a person's lifespan?
As a matter of fact, we use the term "Before Christ" or B.C. or "In the year of our Lord" known as A.D., and we are dating historical periods in reference to the birth date of a person (Christ).There was a discussion before about Gen 11:16-17

quote:

---

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

---

It was concluded by many that it meant, Eber was actually 34 yrs old and then begat Peleg.(Literally Speaking)
But if we think of how this calendar was placed, Eber's son could have been born 34 years afterwards, who God decides he would NOT place his name in the Bible, then Peleg would have been born about the time Eber would be dying or near death, since Eber's sons would not be appropiate to be named or not important in the calendar of the Bible.
So in between Eber and Peleg it could have been 3 or more generations!!!
(Otherwise Eber would still be alive throughout Peleg's life and death, and why wouldn't God just say in Gen 10:25 that the earth was divided in Eber's time, and put such a statement on Peleg?)This method could've been used to many of the calendar Partriarchs, making it a lot longer than we thought! This provides evidence that there could have been different tribes and plenty of people who bacame the Mayans and so forth.
And, it should pop a question in our minds, is the earth really 6-7000 years old, or could it be double times longer?
And it should also tell us that we shouldn't look at the Bible literally, but comparison of verses and carefull study will reveal the truth.Here's the link to the source:
http://www.timehasanend.org/..._time_has_an_end_ch03.html#04So do you think this is a correct way to approach the calculation of the Bible?Edited by Crue Knight, : No reason given.

---

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

I added this when my comp was offline. So it's supposed to be continued from the topic. (It's not nessecarily meant to join the topic, but it's an add-on)
-----
Another Example of this is in Gen. 11:12 Was Arphaxad 35 yrs old, then begat Salah? Or could he be a grandfather? It seems the previous is true.
But look at Luke 3:35-36 With Cainan placed between them we see Sala could've not been an immediate son of Arphaxad. (Remembering also the phrase "called his name" was not used)
This is evidence that when the Bible states "lived x years and begat someone" doesn't indicate any father-son relationship.------------Another example of a verse that can really mean a longer period of time than it seems at first glance:
Gen. 31:41 We must examine this verse carefully. It seems to say that Jacob was in Laban's house at Haran for 20 yrs: 14 yrs he worked to marry Leah & Rachel; 6 yrs he worked for Laban's cattle.
If this is true, Jacob married Leah after 7 yrs then bore 11 sons and a daughter in the next 7 yrs. (Also noting there are no twins (Gen 29:31-35))
To believe he could bare so many children n 7 yrs is pretty impossible.
But then we read in Gen 30:35-36 that Jacob could not have been living in Laban's house: Note the underlined.
This is further supported in Gen 31:22 So we can be assured that Jacob no longer lived at Laban's house during the six yrs he cared for Laban's cattle.Now that this is understood, we understand what Gen 31:41 means. the first year 14 yrs Jacob worked to marry Leah & Rachel (obviously). Then the next 20 yrs he lived with his family in Laban's house. Therefore from the time he married Leah & Rachel to the time he moved out of Laban's was 27 yrs (7+20). (Remember he married Leah & Rachel after he worked 7 yrs, then he worked 7 more yrs for Rachel, already being married to her)During this period of 27 yrs, Jacob became father to 11 sons and 1 daughter. Gen 30:25-34 teaches that it was right after Joseph was born that Jacob left Haran but worked the final 6 yrs to obtain the cattle.So we see that he lived at lived at Laban's house for 34 yrs and he worked for Laban at a total of 40 yrs.------------

---

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

it's not in the kjv, because the kjv was translated from the masoretic. but guess what? it's in the septuagint. compare

quote:

---

Genesis 11:12-13 (Septuagint)

​

kai ezhsen arfaxad ekaton triakonta pente eth kai egennhsen ton kainan. kai ezhsen arfaxad meta to gennhsai auton ton kainan eth tetrakosia triakonta kai egennhsen uious kai qugateras kai apeqanen kai ezhsen kainan ekaton triakonta eth kai egennhsen ton sala kai ezhsen kainan meta to gennhsai auton ton sala eth triakosia triakonta kai egennhsen uious kai qugateras kai apeqanen

​

And Arphaxad lived a hundred and thirty-five years, and begot Cainan. And Arphaxad lived after he had begotten Cainan, four hundred years, and begot sons and daughters, and died. And Cainan lived a hundred and thirty years and begot Sala; and Cainan lived after he had begotten Sala, three hundred and thirty years, and begot sons and daughters, and died.

---

quote:

---

Genesis 11:12-13 (Masoretic)

​

, — ; —, -—
, — -—, — , ‘ ; — ‘, ‘.

​

And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah: And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters.

---

luke wrote in greek. guess which document he copied? not when you're sleeping with four women. and that's 12 sons and one daughter. no, laban was gone three days journey from his own house. jacob was left to tend the flocks, which he did. do you think he tended laban's flocks at his own house?

quote:

---

Thus have I been twenty years in thy house; I served thee fourteen years for thy two daughters, and six years for thy cattle: and thou hast changed my wages ten times.

---

he was 20 years in laban's house. 7 for each daughter, 6 for the sheep. i don't understand what you think you're saying. this isn't exactly hard reading.

---

4 + 30 = 34. no. take, for instance, arpaxad above.

quote:

---

, — ; —, -—

​

v'arpakshad chay chamesh v'shloshim shanah, v'yoled et-shelah

​

and-arpaxad lived five and-thirty years, and-sired (d.o.)-shelah

​

and arpaxad lived 35 years and fathered shelah

---

the signifies a direct object. arpaxad is doing the action directly to shelah, and that is being his father. — is a noun meaning "child" as in "son" or a verb meaning "father" or "give birth to" depending on the gender.so yes, shelah is literally the direct son of arpaxad in hebrew.Edited by arachnophilia, : typo, grammar

---

I am not sure what it refers to when it says the earth was divided in Peleg's time. Peleg means "watercourse" or something to that effect. Doesn't it?Some folks think the name Peleg refers to water coursing through to divide the earth.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

no, it means "division."the division this chapter is referring to is found in the next chapter.

---

I dont know much about the Masoretic and the Septuagint, so could you explain the differences? And are you sure Septugaint is inspried also? Like I said before, and CAN be proven in the Bible, the word "Father" or the phrase "gave birth to" doesnt mean he is a direct father.
And keep in mind, why would God say in Peleg's time the earth was divided? Why not say Eber's time? And why would Peleg be mentioned in the Bible?

Have you forgotten already ? The reason why the Bible refers to Peleg instead of Eber is because it is explaining why Peleg was given that name.
I

You dont get my point. Why was he named that if the earth divided during Eber's time?

Probably because he was born at the time it was happening or shortly before (maybe even afterward). Why would Eber being alive at the time make any difference ?11Edited by PaulK, : Provide reason for edit here.

the septuagint is a greek translation completed ~200bc, done by 72 rabbis in alexandria. it is the oldest text we have of the bible.the masoretic is (more or less PROBABLY) the original hebrew, with vowels, spaces, divisions, cantilations, and emendations, from about 200 ad. it was for a long time the oldest hebrew text of the bible (until the dead sea scrolls were found). it is the basis for most modern translations, including the kjv, and is generally considered the definitive bible.there are some changes that are evident between the two versions, but they are very, very few in number. this happens to be one of them. your choice is between an older text that is a translation, and a newer text in the original. imho, that puts them on more or less equal ground.i prefer the hebrew, but that's a personal opinion. i don't consider either inspired in the tradition fundamentalist christian sense of every word dictated by god himself.but evidently, luke was copying from the septuagint and not an earlier hebrew version. this is not a suprise -- luke spoke and wrote in greek. yes, like you said before. those points i just refuted, with a decent grammatical argument.the word "yeled" means "child." as a verb, "yolad" means "to cause child." and the grammar points to cause a specific child. if we're skipping generations, and they don't work as direct genealogies, why mention ANYONE in particular?peleg is mentioned because he's named after the division. his lifetime is the marker for when it happened. yes, it also happened within eber's lifetime too, but peleg's is more specific.

---

because eber already had a name.

---

I meant why not skip Peleg? If Eber lived after Peleg's lifetime even when Peleg died, then why mention him? Why not say, the earth divided during Eber's time?
If dont know what I mean, do the calculations. Peleg would have died before Eber his "father" would have died. So his father outlived him.

quote:

---

I meant why not skip Peleg? If Eber lived after Peleg's lifetime even when Peleg died, then why mention him? Why not say, the earth divided during Eber's time?

---

Because it isn't giving a date for the division. It is explaining why Peleg was named "Peleg".Why are you so determined to ignore what the Bible says ??