Biblical chronology

by Anti-Christ 30 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Anti-Christ
    Anti-Christ

    I found an article on internet infidels about the 430 years the Israelites spent in Egypt, very interesting. I would like to have some of your comments on it.

    Future articles will examine in detail specific examples of textual errors in the Bible, so for now I will review only briefly a few of the ones that cast serious doubts on the doctrine of Bible inerrancy. An excellent one to begin with would be the obvious contradiction that results when Exodus 12:40 is compared to the Aaronic genealogy found in Exodus 6:16-20 . The first passage declares that the Israelites, who were beginning their famous journey to the promised land, had dwelt in Egypt for 430 years. According to the genealogy in Exodus 6 , however, the Israelite sojourn in Egypt could have lasted no more than 352 years and probably even considerably less than that.

    This genealogy, along with its parallels in I Chron. 6:1-3 and 23:6-13 , establishes that Moses was the great grandson of Levi. Kohath, the grandfather of Moses, had already been born when Jacob took his sons and their families into Egypt, ( Gen. 46:11 ). If we assume that Kohath was only a suckling infant in his mother's arms when he was taken into Egypt and if we further assume that his last act on earth at the age of 133 ( Ex. 6:16 ) was to sire Amram, the father of Moses, then the very latest date of Amram's birth would have been around 134 years into the Israelite sojourn. If we then make similar assumptions about the birth of Moses, i.e., that Amram sired him just before dying at the age of 137 years ( Ex. 6:20 ), this would mean that Moses could have been born no later than 272 years after the Israelite sojourn began. Since Moses was only 80 years old when Jehovah (Yahweh) called him to lead the Israelites out of Egypt ( Ex. 7:7 ), the sojourn could have lasted no longer than 352 years.

    But to allow even 352 years for the so-journ would require total abandonment of common sense. For one thing, the custom of listing sons in the order of their births in Jewish genealogies suggests that the Bible writers understood that both Kohath and Amram had younger brothers ( Gen. 46:11 ; Ex. 6:16-18 ), so Kohath was probably older than an infant when he was taken into Egypt. If he did live to be 133, he undoubtedly fathered Amram, Moses' father, long before he died, because, it is completely unreasonable to assume circumstances of birth anything at all like those theorized above. The aged Abraham fell on his face and laughed when Yahweh told him that he would soon father a son. "Shall a child be born unto him that is a hundred years old?" Abraham asked, ( Gen. 17:17 ). By the same token, we can ask if it is reasonable to believe Kohath and Amram were able to father children when they were well past the age of 130.

    In the final analysis, however, whether the sojourn lasted as long as 352 years doesn't really matter. The genealogical data in Exodus 6:16-20 clearly indicate the belief in an Egyptian sojourn substantially shorter than 430 years, so that puts this Bible passage in unequivocal conflict with Exodus 12:40 , Genesis 15:13 , and Acts 7:6 , all of which teach that the sojourn lasted at least 400 years. There is an obvious contradiction in the Bible text.

  • Gopher
    Gopher

    AntiChrist, this was a good find -- what an interesting conundrum this presents all who say the Bible is inerrant and inspired. If God inspired tthis error-filled tome, what does that say about Him?

    Didn't even JF Rutherford once say the Bible has many mistakes? There's two things he' got right (along with "religion is a snare and racket").

  • Anti-Christ
    Anti-Christ

    I agree Gopher, I am curious to hear what bible believers have to say.

  • nvrgnbk
    nvrgnbk

    Are you suggesting that the Bible is not a trustworthy historical document?

    I declare you Anti-Christ!

  • Anti-Christ
    Anti-Christ
    I declare you Anti-Christ!

    Thank you!!

  • PrimateDave
    PrimateDave

    Not only is the chronology whacked, but also the fact that a mere 70 people could multiply to over a million in the space of four generations is ludicrous.

    The first generation, the offspring of Jacob's sons that came into Egypt, numbered 55 males. If each one married and had five sons on average, besides daughters, the second generation would number 275 males. The third generation would number 1375 males. Finally, the fourth generation, that of Moses and the Exodus, would number a mere 6875 males, somewhat short of the 600,000 able bodied men, besides women and children, mentioned in the Biblical record, a figure that didn't even include the 22,000 Levite males from a month old and up.

    Dave

  • Anti-Christ
    Anti-Christ

    That's a very good point PrimateDave. Since I have bean doing all this research on the bible it always amazes me to find so many outrageous things. Goes to show that wen you are in a mind controlling religion you are "programed" to see what they want you to see.

  • OnTheWayOut
    OnTheWayOut

    I am not a Bible defender. This information seems very difficult to work into actual chronology,
    but the number of Hebrews can be worked out.

    It is irrelevant how many males there are at the beginning. We would have to count the females
    able to put out a child every 9 to 11 months and assume the greatest number of new children are
    more females, then in that last generation, suddenly the number of male children born became great.
    It sounds farfetched, but what doctrine doesn't sound farfetched when analyzed like this. I didn't
    even factor in the triplets and quadruplets. The standard WT follower would say no matter how
    ridiculous it sounds, it must be so, and it isn't physically impossible.

    Just having 600,000 able men would take less than 12 years for 50,000 mothers or less than 24 years
    for 25,000 mothers. I am giving them a year per child. Throw in a few multiple births and shorten the
    year to 9 months, and you can easily account for the women and children.
    The able men would be varied in ages, so no problem.

    25,000 mothers could come from 1,000 mothers who bore children for more than 20 years straight from
    the age of 14 to 34. In reality, their fruitful years could have been longer than that. It ain't that difficult to
    work out those numbers. I did it in 3 generations.

  • startingover
    startingover

    When you start talking number in the bible, don't forget this thread.

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/92759/1.ashx

  • Anti-Christ
    Anti-Christ

    Thanks startingover, I have read about the sacrificing animal thing before it is quite ridiculous also there are many absurdities likes these in the bible I would like a believer to explain these verses.

    OnTheWayOut, Thanks for trying to explain the number of Israelites but I'm looking for an explanation on the chronology. The "apparent" contradiction with EX: 12:40 and EX 6.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit