Noah, Shem, Arphaxad and related issues

[SimonB]

I have read so many treatises on this issue and yet it remains unresolved to me.

Many approaches seem logical at first but closer examination usually finds some internal inconsistency.

So I wondered what input others here might have.

First let me say what issues I think are of concern.

I am also aware that translation is part of the issue so I've looked at an interlinear bible to see both the Hebrew and English versions.

Gen 5:32 says Noah was the-son-of 500 years and he begat Shem, Ham and Japheth.

Gen 7:6 says Noah was the-son-of 600 years and the floods came and Noah et al went into the ark.

Gen 8:13 uses a slightly different syntax along the lines of he-is-becoming 601 and in that year they left the ark.

Gen 11:10 uses the former syntax to say Shem was the-son-of 100 years and begat Arphaxad but also adds that it was 2 years after the deluge.

As many have pointed out, even taking this to mean the beginning of the flood period there is a conundrum.

This raises some issues for me.

Just how did they count the years of a persons life?

Were the three sons triplets or does Gen 5:32 intend to say that Noah had three sons starting in that year?

Gen 9:24 appears to refer to Ham as the younger, and Gen 10:21 to Japheth as the elder, leading some to suggest that perhaps Shem was begat 2 years later?

Also what does begat [u-iuld] mean? Does it mean conceived or does it refer to actual birth?

I am looking for other input as supported by scripture. I may be missing something that someone else has seen.

 

 

 

[Ezra]

11 hours ago, SimonB said:

I have read so many treatises on this issue and yet it remains unresolved to me.

Have you studied The Chronology of the Old Testament by Martin Anstey?  He has addressed all these issues thoroughly, and going STRICTLY by the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Authorized Version.  He uses the year of man (AN HOM) to compute everything.

He has also pointed out that the chronology of Ptolemy (which has been used as the standard) is incorrect by 82 years, and that the Septuagint and the Samaritan Pentateuch were corrupted and should not be relied on. Please review that book and see if it answers your questions.

[SimonB]

Oddly enough I do have Anstey's "Romance of Bible Chronolgy".

Can't recall why I haven't read it yet.

Sometimes you reads so much you can't recall what you have and haven't read or why one thing or another was put off.

I'm reading it now and so far it seems to say the same things I was thinking.

I think the danger is that some people make fantastic efforts to argue supporting what they wish to believe.

At the time their arguments can't seem so convincing until you really test them.

I particularly liked Anstey's approach to the matter in terms of evidence and such. That's how I feel also.

Principally he has reminded me to remember that the OT is written, as are many works, with a purpose in mind and that we must think about this when reading them. This is especially true when dealing with the specific issue about which I was wondering.

Thanks you saved me a lot of time and worry.

 

[Jayne]

You alluded to the answer yourself in your own OP.

Gen 5:32 "And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth."

Shem is listed as the first son, but only in order how God chose him to be the ancestor of Christ and not the other two. Actually Japheth was the oldest according to Genesis 10:21 - "Sons were also born to Shem, whose older brother was Japheth; Shem was the ancestor of all the sons of Eber."

So if Noah's first son, Japheth, was born when Noah was 500 then Noah's second son, Shem, would have to be born after that.

Noah was 600 when the Flood came and Genesis 11:10 says that two years after the Flood that Shem was 100 years old and had Arphaxad. That would make Shem being born when Noah was 502.

There is the extra two years that you need.

[SimonB]

Yes, I think I thought so but needed to remind myself why it was so.

I should remember what Sir Arthur Conan Doyle said about eliminating what is clearly wrong and see what you're left with.

Anyway the Anstey Book is worth reading so I'll see what else there is in there.

Edited December 4, 2016 by SimonB

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, SimonB.

Something else you may consider is that Jewish age is traditionally counted as 1 year old at birth! He is "entering his first year" at birth. At what we call 1 year old, he is "entering his second year." Also, any part of a year is considered a whole year when reporting ages. (That's true also for reporting events that happen within a person's lifetime.)

Sometimes, one must consider the cultural context as well as the numbers reported to us in English.

[SimonB]

Yes, ironically that was the question that first brought me to this site following a search on the subject of counting age.

As I mentioned in another thread its interesting to note that the ancient Chinese did the same thing. It goes unnoticed usually, but if you see their exhibit in a museum and add up the years you might wonder why they don't add it, its for just that reason.

Its also interesting to see what was really said and how things are translated into English.

Also the question of when a person changed their age. As we do on each "birthday" [anniversary of birth really] or on each new year's day.

I've also heard the theory put forward regarding what is really meant by the words translated to begat.

Is it birth or conception? At least one article I recently read says it is conception.

[Sing40King]

I believe a part of it is because of weather conditions before the flood. There is archeological evidence that it was more of a tropical environment. They had plenty of food, since it wasn't cold was less sickness. I didn't realize before doing a little study for this post that before the flood people were mainly vegeteriens. The animals were still tame. It wasn't until after the flood that people began to eat animals because the ground were different and no trees were left too get fruit from. The Bible also says that before the flood the plants were watered by a mist and there was no rain. After the flood there were changes in the earth's environment, diseases were developed and genetics changed from generation to generation. By Abraham's time the average lifespan was 120 years for Moses it was 70-80. I believe that the changes after the great flood are in part resonsible for the decline in lifespans.