>In interpreting Jude 14 we need to ask: Enoch the seventh what from
>A simpler interpretation is that his is the seventh name in the
>in Genesis 5. This is not the same as saying that he had only six male
>ancestors. We find a somewhat similar situation in Matthew 1:17, where
>Matthew tells us that there were fourteen generations from David to the
>deportation to Babylon. Matthew couldn't have meant fourteen literal
>generations (unless the Bible contradicts itself) for he omitted three
>generations (Joash, Amaziah, and Azariah) between Uzziah and Jotham.
>he is referring to is obviously the number of generations that he had
>actually included in the list that he had just given.
Thanks, Gordon! There's no end to what you can learn here.
I can live with what you're saying, but I still understand there to have
been a "list" which began with a literal Adam and included Enoch at some
measurable distance down the line. I think it is a bit of a stretch to
say that, since three generations were omitted in Matthew, therefore,
Adam was only an allegory.
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]