Contents Page
The Genealogies of Genesis

THE FIRST ELEVEN CHAPTERS of Genesis may be described as a preface to God's revelation of His ways with Abraham and his posterity. They sum up into brief form the history which was a prelude to God's later direction of progression in the affairs of the earth. God's subsequent activity proceeded from the roots set in these chapters, and from them emerged God's people and nation through whom Jehovah, the God of Israel, will yet establish righteousness and peace on the earth. God's Rescuer will yet turn away irreverence from Jacob, to whose descendants these chapters are introductory.

Two chapters, five and eleven, each give a genealogy of the persons involved in the prior happenings. Each of these chapters also serves to show how the persons enumerated therein converge to the one individual who is to become the subject of the epochal event recorded in the chapters which, in each case, immediately follows. Chapter five gathers together the progenitors of Noah. He became the one by whom God preserved humanity through and beyond the deluge. God brought the deluge upon the earth, and so closed the history of that period. The subsequent events are very briefly recorded, and they come to a climax through another genealogy of persons specified in chapter eleven. This chapter prepares for God's command to one, the details of whose descent are there set forth. God's command to Abraham is a focal point. It serves to commence the twelfth chapter and records Abraham's obedience to it, leading up to God's promise. The implementing of that promise commences forthwith, being developed throughout the remainder of this book of God's Beginning, and receiving more and more elaboration and increased definition during the history recorded in all the succeeding scriptures, until we find the correspondence and complement in the book of the Unveiling, which shows God's promises in actual establishment.

THE GENEALOGIES

The brevity of these genealogies shows them to be purposive. They display the unity of mankind and the origin and relationship of God's one nation to the whole race. In them we have the only sources of information from which to build up a dated history of these patriarchal eras. The difficulties and queries which arise are much the same in both chapters. The duration of the life of the patriarchs, particularly before the deluge, seems to be most extreme. This is chiefly because we judge by comparison with present day circumstances. Again, the imagination is not satisfied because these chapters do not allow a great antiquity to man, and yet by no other historical records can they be corrected. Among other problems is the question of the generative age, and consequently the age of marriage in these times. Also what was the length of the year or unit in which reckonings and statements are made. The details of the year, that is, its calendar, is also a matter about which there is inquiry.

HEBREW AND SEPTUAGINT B.C. TIME

Chronology has attracted many persons. Generally the interest has been from the viewpoint of computing a dated historical outline. The disagreement between the figures of the Hebrew, Samaritan and Septuagint texts is a matter that cuts clean across this path. It is a problem that should be considered, and it ought to be decided before any formulations are made on the subject of chronology. For example, the Hebrew text gives the period before the deluge as 1656 years, whereas the Septuagint indicates 2262 years. This gives a difference of 606 years. After the deluge, down to the promise to Abraham, in the Hebrew is 427 years, but the Septuagint fills out to 1207 years, a difference of 780 years. Thus B.C. time by the Septuagint is 1386 years longer than the Hebrew, requiring 5390 rather than 4004 years, accepting the latter tentatively.

The differences in the period before the deluge arise because in the Hebrew figures six individuals show 100 years less at the birth of a son than do those of the Septuagint. The length of life totals are the same, except Lamech, for whom the Septuagint has 753 years.

The Samaritan agrees with the Hebrew as regards the age of Adam and Seth at the birth of a son, but in the case of Jared, Methuselah and Lamech it agrees with the Septuagint. Yet in these cases the Samaritan also disagrees as to the life totals, and gives them as considerably less, though still of great duration.

THE FUNCTIONS OF THE HUMAN BODY

The details of ancient history given in the Scriptures call for our faith. They require to be examined with sympathy. We should not judge that God-formed humanity by mankind as we now see it, and with its present limitations. Nor ought we to think that, with the entry of sin and death, humanity was immediately diminished to its present condition. The record is against the idea, and it is evident that in this early period of history the life expectation is not to be judged by what is now. Moreover, the environment of those times corresponded with the aptitude and thus gave ideal conditions, such as would produce what is indicated in the record. The very great duration of life that obtained prior to the deluge, as well as subsequent to that event, though with decreasing measure, intimates to us much difference in the economy and potentialities of the human body. It must have been that the period in which a human grew from birth to the adult stage was longer than we know now, and in consequence the age for marriage was much higher. The generative powers of the body also continued to a much greater age. It was doubtless some centuries after the deluge ere the length of life, and corresponding bodily powers, became settled to the present limits. Jacob remarked to Pharaoh that his years did not overtake those of his forefathers. The slower growth of the human body in those times is seen in the details around Hagar when Abraham sent her away along with her son Ishmael (Gen. 21:14). Ishmael would be well into his teens when these arose, and yet the record seems to indicate that Hagar carried her son. The other details also given are agreeable to this.

CONTEMPORARY GENERATIONS

In the period from Adam to the deluge we see how longevity led to contemporary generations being much greater in number than our present experience. From Adam to Lamech, the father of Noah, are nine generations, and all are contemporary, for ere the death of Adam occurred, Lamech had reached the age of 56 years. This longevity is observed again subsequent to the deluge, for Noah is contemporary not only with his sons but with eight generations. In each period we have this feature emphasized by the differing and irregular generative ages of some members in the genealogy. All this is according to the figures given in the Hebrew scriptures, upon which our Authorized Version is based. On the other hand, the figures of the Septuagint, even with those considerable ages, lower the number of generations existing at one time. The number comes down to five, with six on two occasions. Today, four generations, with an occasional five, are the possibilities. Later we will have more to say regarding other features resulting from the Septuagint figures.

CHRONOLOGY

The three sources of information are the Hebrew, Samaritan and Septuagint texts of the Scriptures. The value of any decision regarding the differences in the figures of these records is dependent upon a direct examination. The merits of one source as against another can best be estimated by an investigation which weighs the internal evidence, and then considers the results. We must keep within the Scriptures for the purpose of drawing our conclusions. The controversies around this problem, in the early centuries of our era, afford little, if any, satisfaction. They seek a conclusion based mainly on human controversy, and handling of the Scriptures, rather than an understanding coming from immediate consideration of the facts and evidence within God's Word.

One writer, who has examined the history of the early controversies, makes a decision in favor of the Hebrew. To reach this conclusion he rejects Luke 3:36, which gives Cainan as the son of Arphaxad. The name is omitted both in the Hebrew and Samaritan texts. This is a crucial point. We insist that it is not a detail, and that acceptance or rejection of Cainan goes to the root of the whole question as to the respective worth of these figures. Unfortunately the above writer's rejection is on the scantiest of evidence; in fact, it cannot be so termed. The explanation put forward is too flimsy, since it actually questions the foundation of inspiration.

Kennicott shows, from Eusebius, that some Hebrew copies, having the larger numbers of the Septuagint, existed in the fourth century. Others, on the authority of Jacobus Edessenus, found them as late as the year 700, whilst others, much later, are mentioned in the Chronicle of Ecchellensis. Nevertheless we prefer to put aside the conclusions of others, either of approval or of disapproval, and seek firsthand evidence from the sources themselves. For example, the name Cainan is given in Luke 3:36. This at once proves the Septuagint of Genesis 11:12 to be genuine. We cannot escape this and must accept the name and details into our conclusions, and adjust the Hebrew text to accord. Thus 135 years must be added to all chronologies.

GENERATIVE AGES

The Hebrew and Samaritan texts agree in regard to the generative ages of Adam (130 years) and Seth (105 years). After these the Samaritan decreases each generation, reaching 53 years in the case of Lamech, that is, through seven generations. In these generations the Hebrew has the first three with generative ages as 90, 70 and 65, which are the same as the Samaritan. They are then followed by one of 162 years, yet in the next decreasing to 65, finally increasing to 187 and 182 for the next two persons. Thus we have three generations in which the Hebrew and Samaritan differ by 100, 120 and 129 years. In these cases the Samaritan reduces the final ages by 115, 249 and 100 years. At the time of the deluge Noah's sons had no children, yet were each about 100 years old.

Subsequent to the deluge, for eight generations, further, Arphaxad to Nahor, the figures of the Septuagint and Samaritan agree in all cases, except in regard to Cainan as the son of Arphaxad and father of Shelah, for Cainan is not contained in the Samaritan. These figures are in every case 100 years above the Hebrew, for the Hebrew figures range from 35 to 29 years. Yet the ninth generation, when life has shortened, in the Hebrew it rises to 70 as the age of generation. In the figures for the life totals there is general agreement between Hebrew and Samaritan, despite the conflict between the generative ages.

In the figures of the Septuagint referring to the time before the deluge their consistency is very evident, and those for the time subsequent to that event very definitely indicate a trend of life which is agreeable as a transition to the uniformity to be reached in later times. For instance, we note that Terah had no son until the age of 70. To this both Hebrew and Septuagint agree. Yet in the Hebrew the two prior generations of Serug and Nahor are 30 and 29 respectively. The Septuagint makes these 130 and 79, so that we get a sequence of 130, 79, 70, with 60 in the case of Isaac. It is with Nahor that the generative age becomes distinctly decreased.

MARRIAGE AGE

This question is not of great importance, but, since it bears a relation to the generative age, then we may gain understanding which will correct or confirm our conclusions in that direction. As to the antediluvians we have no statements other than those for ages at the birth of a son. We can but conclude marriage to have taken place at an age comparable to what is stated with regard to the birth of children. With the post-diluvians we have more information, yet because we find a changing age for the birth of children, so it would seem to be that the age of marriage also changes. In our consideration of this matter we will put aside the figures of the Hebrew and follow those of the Septuagint, since they show a much better harmony with other details about which we have briefly spoken under the last heading.

The age at which Terah would marry was probably around 60 years, since he was 70 when his son Haran was born. He was also the father of Nahor and Abraham, beside a daughter, Sarah, who is also named.

Haran died whilst his father Terah still lived. This does not enable us to settle his actual age, but it means that at his death Haran was under 135 years. To him were born Lot, Milcah and Iscah. The circumstances suggest that he married at a similar age to his father Terah. Terah moved from Ur of the Chaldees after Haran's death, and he took along with him, Abram, as well as Sarah, the wife of Abram. At this time Abram would be about 70, and Sarah 60. Then is it mentioned that Sarah is becoming barren. So that it would appear that Abraham also married at an age similar to Terah.

Nahor, born between Haran and Abram, married Milcah, the daughter of his elder brother Haran. To Nahor were born eight children, one of whom, Bethuel, was the father of Rebecca, whom Isaac married. Rebecca's brother, Laban, was the father of two daughters, Leah and Rachel, and these Jacob, the son of Isaac, married.

The differences in the ages of Haran and Nahor would be such as to allow Haran's daughter to be of a comparable age to Nahor. For example, Lot may have been a little older than Abraham. Thus, at the destruction of Sodom, the children of Lot were of marriageable age.

We may perceive some confirmation of the marriage age around Abram by noting that from the birth of Terah to the marriage of Isaac is 270 years. Now from Terah, through Nahor and Bethuel to Rebecca, is four generations, which divided into the years easily gives us 60 years, and an allowance of 30 years for say the late birth of Bethuel. There is also the fact that Isaac married at 40, which would give us more years.

Isaac was of the second generation from Terah through Abram. He married Rebecca, who was of the third generation from Terah through Nahor, one of Abram's brothers. This possibility is explained by the statement regarding Sarah's barrenness, together with the late birth of Isaac. With the marriage of Isaac at forty, and later of Esau, one of Isaac's sons, we see a younger age than hitherto amongst these patriarchs.

ABRAHAM AND SARAH — DEADENED OR OLD

The details around Abram, in the matter of the generative powers of his body, seem to be hazily understood amongst us. It is thought that such powers were the same to Abraham and his contemporaries as those which obtain today, and have obtained during many centuries. When it is said in Romans 4:19 (C.V.) that Abraham considers his body already deadened (being inherently somewhere about a hundred years), do we not think from our own viewpoint of the impossible position which is presented to Abraham because he is a man aged about 100 years? In fact, does not Abraham, in Gen. 17:17, strike the same note concerning himself and Sarah? And, moreover, is not this idea taken up by Sarah herself in Gen. 18:12? Yet, in such a view, are we not missing altogether the point that Abraham was born when his father was 130 years old, and also that Sarah was born to Terah when he was 140? So that, ought we not to perceive that the mere age of Abram and Sarah was not the cause of their being childless. It would scarcely be a remarkable thing to Abram for a man of his own age, that is 100 years, to beget a son, for was not this the case all around him?

The explanation of the experience of Abram and Sarah is to be discovered in God's dealings with them. And their experience was not simply a question of the deadening of the matrix of Sarah, but also that Abram's body was deadened. In neither case was the deadening the effect of the action of time, but of God directing His ways. It was not the simple case of God reviving bodily powers in old age, but that He took away virility and later He restored it. In Gen. 17:17 Abram indicates that his own vigor was passed when saying: to one a hundred years of age is a son being born? And this he stresses in the next verse by the words, Oh, that Ishmael shall live before Thee! And not only so, but Romans 4:19 says of Abram's body that it was already deadened. And again in Hebrews 11:12 it is said that he who begets is deadened. The facts around Sarah have been recognized, so that we need not stress them. The plain situation comes to be that at the time when Abram lived, human generation was not confined within present-day limits, nor was the duration of life reduced to what now obtains. In the scriptural records these were changing since the deluge, and, broadly speaking, they continued to change and to be adjusted during the remainder of the years covered by the book of Genesis, and even somewhat beyond.

Though the condition of the bodies of Abraham and Sarah was not the result of age, yet there are in the recorded words of Abraham and Sarah some details which, when judged from the experience of the present, seem to argue that they were indeed old. In Gen. 17:17 Abram was not stating, nor was he thinking of, conditions which were general to all the peoples then alive, but he referred to circumstances peculiar to himself and his wife. And so also is it that Sarah in Gen. 18:12 spoke in the same sense. In uttering these words, Sarah was fully aware as to the fact predicated of herself and Abraham in 18:11 that they were old, coming into days. This position was particular to them, and Sarah did not view the renewal of vitality as possible. Sarah spake of her own decadence, and, corresponding to this decadence in herself, her lord was old. Their bodily powers were disintegrated. This was a sign of old age apart from the actual matter of years.

When we examine the Hebrew word meaning old (zqn), we see that its usage is not only in reference to the aggregation of years due to the passing of time, but also to indicate a condition as to bodily vitality. This condition, though requiring the passage of time, is termed old, since it bears definite comparison to the feature as associated with the aged. Thus the word is a relative term. Its intention can be much emphasized by the use along with it of such a word as very (1 Sa. 2:22). We ought thus to see that in Gen. 18 it is used of the condition of the bodily powers of Abraham and Sarah rather than their age in years. Approximately forty years after Isaac's birth it is still said of Abraham that he was old and come to days (Gen. 24:1). Yet Abraham lived a further period of over 35 years. God's renewal of Abram's virility was such that, after the death of Sarah, he married Keturah, and to him were born six sons. Then of his death it is said, he was in a good gray-haired age, old and satisfied with days. Of Isaac (Gen. 27:1, 2) it is also said that he was old. Yet he lived a further 60 years or more. This was said in reference to the eyesight of Isaac, which had become dimmed.

Lot was of a similar age to Abraham, his uncle. It may even have been that Lot was a little the elder, for Haran, the father of Lot, was 60 years of age at the time of Abram's birth. The unmarried daughters of Lot, who escaped with him from Sodom, referred to their father as old (Gen. 19:31), yet Lot became father to their sons at that age. This happening occurred around the time of the birth of Isaac.

HEBREW AND SEPTUAGINT RESULTS CONTRASTED

Genesis five has reference to those born before the deluge. Adam died in the year 930, and, apart from the slain Abel, his death is the first recorded. As Adam approached the time of his death, his pre-eminence amongst his descendants was gradually declining, and we reach a point (Gen. 6:1-4) when he had become just a man, one of the race, hardly discerned as the one created and formed by God.

The Hebrew of chapter five makes Enoch, who was the seventh from Adam, to be born in the year 622, and so Adam and Enoch would be contemporaries for 308 years. Enoch was transferred 57 years after Adam's death. Jude speaks of Enoch prophesying during his life of 365 years on earth, and this is agreeable to the statement that Enoch walked with God. By these figures Adam would hear the proclaiming of Enoch!

On the other hand, the Septuagint shows that Adam died before Enoch was born. In fact, Enoch's birth was 192 years after Adam's decease. So the two were not contemporary. It seems that God did not specifically place Adam under anyone's dominance, and that he had the fullest freedom during his lifetime. The witness of Enoch was introduced later and was more in point when Adam had passed off the scene.

By the Hebrew figures, Seth died 55 years after Enoch was transferred. Seth's son, Enosh, feared Jehovah, and though wounded by one of his fellow men, yet, acknowledging God's authority, he called upon the name of Jehovah (Gen. 4:26). (This is discussed in U.R. vol. 33, page 111 to 118.) Enosh lives a further 98 years beyond his father, and thus 153 years beyond the transference of Enoch. It seems clear that Seth's son, Enosh, by his action and attitude, witnessed against the evil of his contemporaries. The Hebrew figures cloud any relationship or system around Seth's son and Enoch, but the Septuagint figures put Seth's death 20 years after Enoch's birth, and Enosh died when Enoch was 218. This leaves 147 years before Enoch was transferred. Thus it seems that Enoch carried on the witness begun by Seth and his son Enosh. We submit that this gives a view which lends importance to these brief details, for, starting with Seth, and to his son, Enosh, followed by Enoch, we have a continuous witness for God, which was later confided to the hands of Noah.

In the Hebrew Methuselah died in the same year as the deluge; in fact, only a few days before. But the Septuagint shows his death as six years earlier than the deluge. Enoch's son was certainly named Die-send to accord with the proclaiming of his father, yet it would seem more appropriate that there should be a period of waiting after his death rather than that it should happen in the closing weeks.

The length of Methuselah's life is an outstanding example of the patience of God (1 Pt. 3:20). Enoch connected the coming judgment with his death. As God waited long, as usual, before venting His wrath, Methuselah could not die until the deluge was nearly due.

We turn to Genesis eleven. Due to the decreasing length of life and the early generative age given in the Hebrew text, following the deluge we have a number of seemingly peculiar features. This is readily realized by a little reflection, for if Noah lived 350 years beyond the deluge, and Noah's descendants were mature around the age of 30 years, then this, with a shortened life, made Noah outlive the son of Eber, Peleg, by 10 years. Yet Eber lived four years beyond Abraham! If we work out the contrasts of the Hebrew figures as against those of the Septuagint, we venture to think it will be seen that the figures of the Septuagint give a chronology not only much to be preferred, but with greater inherent consistency. We append a list designed to show details of Hebrew and Septuagint for ready comparison.

The Hebrew figures give Noah's death but two years before the birth of Abram. This does not seem to be very apt, for Terah would be the contemporary of Noah for 128 years. When we turn to the Septuagint we note that Noah died 782 years before Abraham was born. Do we not recognize this length of time, indicated by the Septuagint, as being more in accord with the necessity for God to turn to Abraham as the channel through whom He would move forward? God does not introduce new factors, or make fresh moves, until the situation shows the reason for doing so. Noah was the man of faith to begin this period. Was he still living and failing in faithfulness to God? Rather does it appear that Noah was reposing many centuries before Abraham was called from his perishing position.

If the confusion of language occurred in the days of Peleg, and this seems most likely, then Noah, by the Hebrew text, lived some 200 years amidst it, but by the Septuagint, Noah had died some 200 years earlier. God called attention to Himself by the confusion of language, and later by His call to Abram, seeing that the nations persisted in their course even after that judgment.

Peleg was a notable person; in his days the earth was distributed. By the Hebrew teat his birth was 101 years after the deluge, and this would make him, during the whole of his life of 239 years, to be the contemporary of Noah, for he died 10 years before the decease of Noah! But the Septuagint indicates the death of Noah as 182 years before Peleg was born. Noah did not witness God's further judgment, but died ere it fell on the nations of the post-diluvians.

From the Hebrew figures in regard to Shem, we find he lived 150 years contemporary with Abraham. Where was Shem during God's dealings with Abram? Why should it be necessary for God to call Abram from his idolatry? The Septuagint shows Shem's death as 630 years before Abraham's birth, and thus we see the way is clear for God to call others through whom to deal with the conditions on the earth.

By the Hebrew Shem lived 401 years amidst the parting of mankind and the confusion of language. The Septuagint shows him to be dead 29 years earlier. Shem would see the state of human society ere he died, but he did not live a long period coeval with God's judgments upon it.

Similarly, according to the Hebrew, Shem lived 50 years beyond the birth of Isaac, which would be 10 years beyond Isaac's marriage as well as the death of Isaac's mother, Sarah. This does not seem at all agreeable or likely. The Septuagint makes Shem to be dead 730 years before Isaac's birth.

Abram's birth was, by the figures of the Hebrew text, 352 years subsequent to the deluge, but the Septuagint shows it to be 1132 years later. This is much more likely as a situation which required God's activity around Abraham.

There seems to be some incongruity around Eber, for by the Hebrew text he was born 285 years before Abram, and thus he lived four years beyond the death of Abraham. If Abraham died in a good grey-haired age, then what would we say of Eber? The figures preserved by the Septuagint are much more likely, for by them, at Eber's birth, 735 years were required to that of Abram, and at Eber's death, 331 years are still needed to Abram's birth.

THE CALENDAR

The calendar has been a problem to the nations of the earth right down the course of the centuries. Even to English speaking countries the adoption of the present form of the calendar is a comparatively recent event.

The length of the year is the time between the spring or the autumnal equinox of one year to that of the following year. The period of the deluge, as indicated by the dates of the commencement and conclusion, together with the details and dates which fill up these limits, covers a period of 360 days, which is obviously the length of one year, since, as shown by the Septuagint, the period stretches from the 27th of the second month of one year to the 27th of the second month of the following year. It is difficult to understand why these dates, and this period are used, except on the basis that 360 days was the duration used by Noah for the year, and that this was the length of the year prior to the deluge. In this we also are able to perceive a reason for the use of 360 days for the so-called prophetic year. God continues to use that length given by Him to the year which He instituted in the six days work of restoration, even though, due to changes connected with the deluge, the year subsequently became 365 1/4 days. Such changes were not simply ecliptical, giving rise to the seasons, but also orbital, lengthening the year.

When speaking of the calendar, we should note that the second month of Genesis seven is not the same as the second month of the year required by the Passover institution. Genesis seven requires a year commencing around the end days of our September, but the Passover requires a year commencing around the end days of our March.

CONCLUSION

How shall we formulate our attitude to the preceding consideration of these matters? Can it be other than that the Septuagint has retained the original text? And, if so, then ought we not to accept them for translation in our proposed Concordant Version?

E. H. Clayton

GENESIS

CONTAINS
THE SEED PLOT OF THE BIBLE

All names in the Hebrew language have meanings, and also the numbers have a meaning in addition to their numeric value, and often more than one meaning. The number ten means ordained, and obviously of God. It is also the number pertaining to the Gentiles.

Take, for instance, the first ten names of the Patriarchs in the line of Seth: read them as stated in 1 Chronicles 1, and in their meanings we get a step further in revelations as to man's redemption.

Now read off the meanings of the words, and omit the names, and we are reading that which is prophetic of the Lord Jesus Christ. Italic words are supplied for readability.

"Man is appointed to be miserable and incurable, the object of mercy. One Who is mighty with God shall descend — the Consecrated One — His death shall send forth, when smitten, rest."

E. H. Clayton

Contents Page

"Grace and Truth" granted permission
  to Martin Lee (GoodNewsGospel.info)
 to copy and distribute this document.