Re: 2900 BC vs. 2350 BC and Bible chronology

From: gordon brown (
Date: Tue May 07 2002 - 11:23:11 EDT

  • Next message: Keith B Miller: "Re: GEN 1-11: Beyond the concordist debate"


    Have you read William Henry Green's Primeval Chronology (Bibliotheca
    Sacra, 47(1890), 285-303)? I think it is the classic treatise on this
    subject. It is printed as an appendix in Genesis 1 and the Origin of the
    Earth by Newman and Eckelmann. His article compares the genealogies in the
    Bible and notes the apparent discrepancies. He argues quite convincingly
    that it was normal in Hebrew genealogies to skip generations in order to
    make a segment have the desired number of generations. (Matthew 1 is
    typical of this.)

    Gordon Brown
    Department of Mathematics
    University of Colorado
    Boulder, CO 80309-0395

    On Mon, 6 May 2002 wrote:

    > As I mentioned in a recent post to Dick, I have recently completed a several
    > year long study of the historical records found in the scriptures, with a
    > view to determining if the chronological information contained therein can be
    > used, and was intended by God to be used, to accurately assign historical
    > dates to various events recorded in the Old and New Testaments. I have come
    > to the conclusion that the chronological information contained in the Bible's
    > historical records was preserved there by God for us to use for that very
    > purpose. I am convinced that the Bible itself, with the help of several
    > "anchor" dates provided to us by secular historians, tells us that Noah's
    > flood occurred in 2350 BC. I have thoroughly considered and dispensed of all
    > arguments to the contrary, including the argument that the Genesis
    > genealogies may contain "gaps" which some say are evidenced by a "second
    > Cainan" not listed in the Genesis genealogies, who Luke is said to have
    > listed in his genealogy of Christ.
    > As has been noted, this 2350 BC date for Noah's flood is the same date that
    > James Ussher assigned to the flood over 350 years ago based on his study of
    > Bible chronology. In my opinion, Ussher got lucky. He ended up with the right
    > date despite the fact that he had been off by over forty years in his dating
    > of a very crucial event in Old testament history. That event was the division
    > of the kingdom of Israel upon the death of Solomon. He dated that event to
    > 976 BC, which cannot possibly be reconciled with several well established
    > dates in Bible history.
    > However, I believe Usher was correct in the literal way in which he
    > understood the chronological information contained in the Genesis
    > genealogies, which caused him to date Noah's flood at about 2350 BC
    > (2349-2348). And in his 4004 dating of Adam's creation, though I prefer 4005.
    > Mike

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 07 2002 - 12:17:29 EDT