The following study is also available in printable format HERE

 

“Genesis by the Numbers”

 

A Study of Two Different Worlds

 

ABSTRACT

This analysis addresses the impact of the different genealogy numbers for the Patriarchs Adam to Abraham found in Genesis 5 & 11 in the modern Catholic and King James Bible, the so-called “Hebrew Masoretic Text”, completed in 600-900 AD, and the earlier Septuagint [Greek translation] of the Hebrew Bible in 300-200 BC. The Septuagint Old Testament is claimed to be the main bible used in the time of Jesus and in the early Catholic church until the Masoretic text became the preferred source and is also the bible still used by the Eastern Orthodox church. As we will show the difference in the Genesis numbering results in “two” possible periods, one being a “Masoretic” world where events and figures play out in a 2000 BC Mesopotamia, and the other where the flood and Noah’s decendents occur some 1000 years earlier in a 3000 BC world. A Chart is provided depicting the two “Septuagint” and “Masoretic” eras alongside extra biblical Mesopotamian history followed by selected topics for a comparative analysis, such as the Flood, Nimrod, and the Tower of Babel. This analysis also addressees the question of whether Abraham co-existed with Noah or Shem or any other of his ancestors. Three answers are provided which differ depending on your bible and faith.  In the Septuagint Genesis 5 & 11 numbering scheme Abraham DID NOT co-exist with Noah or Shem or Eber as they all died hundreds of years before he was born. The Masoretic case has two possible answers depending on your faith and bible interpretation of the age Terah had Abraham [70 for Hebrew and 130 for Christian tradition]. Both cases are summarized in Table 2 where it is shown only in the Hebrew case can Abraham co-exist with Noah, who lives until Abraham is 58. In the Ussher Christian version Noah would die 2 years before Abraham is born [60 year difference].

3.1. Which is the Original Version of Genesis 5 & 11?

Up until now we have not addressed the obvious question of “which” of the two versions of Genesis 5 & 11 is most likely the “original”. If the Septuagint [bible translation] predates the Masoretic text by almost a thousand years why do we [mostly] follow the Masoretic derived numbers of ‘4000 BC’ for creation and not the Septuagint version of ‘5500 BC’? In his article “The Case for the Septuagint’s Chronology in Genesis 5 and 11”, Henry B. Smith Jr. makes a very compelling case for the Septuagint text as being the “original” authentic version.  Using ancient scholars and their work as proof Smith provides compelling evidence that the proto [pre] Masoretic version used to translate into the Septuagint did in fact contain the longer Septuagint-like chronology. Josephus (90 AD), Demetrius (220 BC), Eupolemus (160 BC), Pseudo-Philo’s Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum (1st century AD), all list the longer Septuagint-like 5500 year creation date [versus Masoretic 4000 years] suggesting that the versions they were reading must have had the longer [+1386 year] Adam to Abraham chronology. He adds that Josephus’ calculations also match Septuagint-like dating and that Josephus read Hebrew and would have had [and provides evidence he did have] a Hebrew copy of the bible he was working from. All these arguments support that the early pre-Masoretic Hebrew bible [may have ] been closer to the Septuagint than Masoretic chronology thus making the Septuagint Genesis 5 & 11 numbers [or similar numbers] the correct and “original” numbers.

3.2.  A 1000 years is a big difference

Our working hypothesis is that two possible realities exist for the early events and biblical figures which differ by about a 1000 years resulting in a “3000 BC” “Septuagint” versus a “2000 BC” Masoretic world. Most historians largely agree that by 2000 BC great city-states existed in Mesopotamia such as the Akadian Sargon I empire, whereas a thousand years prior the region was mostly decentralized cities under Sumer control. The very first “recorded“ king of a united Sumer Etana of Kish appeared in 2800 BC. Writing is said to have first emerged in Mesopotamia in c. 3400–3100 BC and Egypt in c. 3250 BC. The great pyramids were not built until about 2600 BC. A ‘Septuagint’ flood in 3238 BC therefore would come ‘before’ recorded and verifiable history and pyramids whereas a ‘Masoretic’ flood in 2105 BC would take place in a world after the pyramids and ‘during’ recorded history and reigns of kings. The same metrics apply to Noah and his sons and ancestors. They either lived in a ‘2000 BC’ or a ‘3000 BC’ world, not both.  In short:

The different Septuagint and Masoretic Genesis Chapter 5 & 11 numbers result in two different periods for the lives of Noah to Abraham and associated biblical events, one centered on c. 2000 BC, where writing and history was established, the other in c. 3000 BC Mesopotamia, when much less is known or can be proven. 

In the next section we provide an interactive “Chart” depicting the two ‘parallel’ realities for the Septuagint and Masoretic versions for creation, the flood, the Tower of Babel, and the lives of the Patriarchs, along with contemporaneous extra biblical history and archeological periods local to Mesopotamia where the bible events take place. Following the chart, and within the chart in form of hover notes, we provide analyses of a Septuagint or Masoretic chronology.

4. CHART OF ADAM TO ABRAHAM – THE MASORTEIC & SEPTUAGINT WORLDS

^aDating in BC secular year taken from www.Chabad.org which agrees with AM dating provided in Table 1, Abraham born 1948 AM.

 

4.1. A Masoretic v. Septuagint Flood Date

A “Masoretic” flood in c. 2000 BC in Mesopotamia would occur at a time when extra biblical history is seemingly contiguous and no recorded floods or major interruptions are apparent that would fit a ‘restart’ of humanity after a flood. This is shown in chart for Sargon I c. 2300 BC until Hammurabi and the Old Babylonia period in 1800 BC.  A flood in Egypt during this period is equally challenging, where archelogy, carbon dating, and Egyptian Pharoh dating establishes the Great Pyramids were build c. 2600 BC and the pyramids and surrounding archelogy show no flood layers [fish fossils etc].  For these and other reasons a Septuagint or “3000 BC” [plus or minus several hundred years] flood is ‘easier’ to accommodate as the lack of city states and documented history this early would at least not preclude a flood event.  

Conclusions

A Masoretic flood date of c. 2300-2000 BC in Egypt would have occurred after the pyramids were built c. 2600 BC yet no water penetration or flood deposits [aquatic fossils] are found. Further both Mesopotamia and [more so] Egypt have well documented archelogy and confirmed history such as King Lists none of which show disruption during this period linked to a catastrophic flood with destruction of all life.

A Septuagint flood dating of c. 3300-2800 BC allows plenty of time for Mizraim to be born and establish Egypt and the pyramids by 2600 BC. This period also [mostly] precedes written history or verifiable archelogy in Mesopotamia and Egypt thus can neither be proven nor disproven.

4.2.  Nimrod

Nimrod is summarized in our chart using hover notes. Based on claims made in Book of Jasher and other Judaic sources we have placed Nimrod’s Masoretic date of birth at 1853 BC and death at age 215 at the hands of Esau. The Septuagint estimated chronology for Nimrod is shown in the Chart but no available anchor dates make it possible to further pinpoint a Septuagint birth date.

4.2.1. Background

Nimrod was son of Cush son of Ham great-grandson of Noah. The bible scripture contains only vague facts on Nimrod; “the first on earth to be a mighty man”…” a mighty hunter before the Lord” and “Assyria is called the land of Nimrod” In Genesis the beginning of his kingdom is said to have been Babel, Erech (Uruk), and Akkad, in the land of Shinar. Nimrod is said to have then built Nineveh, Calah (modern Nimrūd), Rehoboth-Ir, and Resen. While nothing in canon allows one to link Nimrod to any living patriarchs and thus date him, Historians, Orientalists, Assyriologists and mythographers have long tried to find links between the Nimrod of the bible and a real historically attested figure in Mesopotamia. No king name of Nimrod [unambiguously] appears in pre-biblical, extra-biblical or historic Sumerian, Akkadian, Assyrian or Babylonian king lists, nor in any other writings from Mesopotamia or its neighbors during the Bronze Age, Iron Age or pre-Christian Classical Age. While we summarize a few of the more popular hypotheses on the identity of Nimrod there is no consensus on when he lived and who his historical counter-part may have been so we do not further pursue this. The bible itself never even links Nimrod with the Tower of Babel explicitly. The only sources we can turn to for Nimrod reside with the ancient Jewish writers Philo of Alexandria, Flavius Josephus, as well as the Pseudepigrapha Book of Jasher and Christian Syriac Cave of Treasures, and Talmud, and other midrash sources, some of which we summarize below.

4.2.  Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha Facts

Book of Jasher [on Nimrod]

1) Nimrod was born to Cush in “old age"

2) Nimrod “ruled 185 years”

3) Nimrod died at age 215 at hand

4) AFTER the Tower of Babel dispersion Nimrod ‘renewed his reign over cities, the first being Babel, where they called him Amraphel , the second was Erech [Uruk]

5) Nimrod ruled over Babel [after the Tower] when Abraham was 52 years old

The Syriac Cave of Treasures [on Nimrod]

When Reu was 130, Nimrod, first king on the earth, reigned, and he reigned 69 years and the beginning of his kingdom was Babel. When Rue was 50 Nimrod built Nisibis, and Edessa, and Harrân, which is Edessa. The exact text from above summary is here.

4.2.3.  Nimrod Analysis: Masoretic v. Septuagint v. Apocrypha

1) If we accept Judaic tradition and the Book of Jasher that Essau killed Nimrod then the Septuagint chronology [where Nimrod dies c. 800 years before Esau born] can not be correct!  In short, ‘one’ of these version must be wrong.

2) The Hebrew given date for the Tower Dispersion of 1765 BC [www.chabot.org] and Abraham born in 1813 BC is consistent also with claims in the Book of Jasher as shown below:

Abraham is 52 in 1761 BC [1813-52] the year Nimrod “renews” his rule over Babel = four years AFTER the Tower dispersion in 1765 BC.

3) The “Cave of Treasures” claims that Rue was 130 is inconsistent with [Hebrew] Masoretic dating. This is perhaps not surprising as the “Cave of Treasures” is identified as an ancient Christian [Syriac] Septuagint-like” timeline thus this claim applies more to the Septuagint Nimrod.

4.2.4.  When did Nimrod Live and Die?

A date of 1853 BC for the birth of Nimrod using arbitrary assumptions is consistent with all Apocrypha claims except Cave of Treasures:

1) We assign birth of Ham in same year as first born brother Shem=2203 BC

2) We assign birth of Cush when Ham is age 100 same as when Shem has Arpachshad = 2103 B

3) We assign birth of Nimrod when Cush is 250 ‘in old age’ giving = 2103-250 = 1853 BC

4) Esau is born 1653 BC making Esau 15 when he kills Nimrod who then dies at age 215:

1853 BC (Nimrod b.) -215 (age Nimrod d.) = 1638 BC (Year Nimrod d.)

5) Nimrod would be 88 years old at the Tower Dispersion in 1765 BC and 92 when Abraham is 52 when he resumes rule in 1761 BC over Babel.

A date of 1853 BC for the birth of Nimrod is consistent with biblical and ancient apocrypha claims allowing Nimrod to have taken part in the Tower of Babel in 1765 BC and then go on to rule Babel and later die at the age of 215, the same year Abraham dies, at the hands of a young 15 year old Essau.  Hover Note

5.  DID ABRAHAM LIVE AT THE SAME TIME AS NOAH?

The question of whether Abraham co-existed with Noah or Shem or any other of his ancestors has three different answers depending on your bible and faith.  In the Septuagint Genesis 5 & 11 numbering scheme, the version used by the Early Catholic & Present day Eastern Orthodox Churches, Abraham DID NOT co-exist with Noah or Shem or Eber as they all died hundreds of years before he was born- Eber 271 years before Abraham and Noah 800+ years prior thus no ‘table’ is required to portray this simple case.  This reality is also ‘seemingly’ reflected in the bible where only Abraham’s father Terah and Nahor his grandfather are mentioned.

The Masoretic case however is more complicated and has two possible answers depending on your faith and bible interpretation of the age Terah had Abraham [70 for Hebrew and 130 for Christian tradition]. Both cases are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Patriarchs Who Lived with Abraham

NOTE: A negative age number [red] are Patriarch that die before Abraham is born. A positive bold number is the age of Abraham when the Patriarch dies. Bracketed numbers [Green] indicate patriarchs that outlive Abraham.

Patriarch	Year Died (AM)	Abraham’s Age When Patriarch Dies
	(in order death)	Christian [Abram b. 2008 AM]	Judaism [Abram b. 1948 AM]
Peleg	1996	-12	48
Nahor	1997	-11	49
Noah	2006	-2	58
Rue	2026	18	78
Serug	2049	41	101
Terah	2083	75	135
Arpachshad	2096	88	148
Shelaha	2126	118a	(3)a
Shem [Ham, Japheth]b	2158	150b	(35)b
Eberc	2187	(4)c	(67)c

^a In Christian Ussher dating Abraham is 118 years old when Shelah dies. In Hebrew dating Shelah outlives Abraham by 3 years.^.
b In Christian Ussher dating Abraham is 150 years old when Shem dies. In Hebrew dating Shem outlives Abraham by 35 years.
^c In both cases Eber outlives Abraham by 4 years (Ussher) or 67 years (Hebrew) version.

The Table shows  that only in the Hebrew case does Abraham co-exist with Noah, who lives until Abraham is 58. In the Ussher [Christian] version Noah would die 2 years before Abraham was born [60 year difference]. The high level summary of the two Masoretic versions is shown below.

Judaic Tradition [Terah is 70 when he has Abraham]

Abraham DID co-exist with Noah and was 58 when Noah dies.

Abraham DID co-exist with Shem who would outlive Abraham by 35 years.

Eber would outlive Abraham by 67 years.

Christian Tradition: [Terah is 130 per “Ussher” when he has Abraham]

Abraham DID NOT co-exist or know Noah who died 2 years before he was born

Abraham DID co-exist and know Shem who dies when Abraham is 150 years old

Eber would outlive Abraham by 4 years.

Other take-aways from Table 2 are using the Christian [Ussher] chronology, Abraham would have ‘known’ and would ‘witness’ starting at age 18 the deaths of Rue, Serug, Terah, Arpachshad, Shelah, and lastly Shem who dies when Abraham is 150. Eber would outlive Abraham by 3 years. Using instead the Hebrew tradition, Abraham would have ‘known’ and would ‘witness’ starting at age 78 [60 years older] the deaths of Peleg, Nahor, Noah, Rue, Serug, Terah, and Arpachshad. Three however, Shelah, Shem, and Eber would all outlive Abraham by 3, 35, and 67 years.

So which Version is True?

If the “Masoretic” version is the correct one and Abraham lived with Shem, Ham, Japheth, possibly even Noah [as in Hebrew tradition], and certainly Eber because he outlives Abraham in either version, why then does the bible make no mention of these important figures that they never once cross paths? No mention of Noah or Shem’s passing or interment? Would they not have [also] lived in Ur of Chaldees or at least close by? Note this argument also extends to Isaac. If Abraham has Isaac at age 100, then Isaac co-exists with Shem who dies when Isaac is 50 and Eber dies when Isaac is 54. In this respect the Septuagint version is better supported as the bible only refers to Terah and Nahor at same time as Abraham ‘implying’ only these two lived at same era as Abraham.

One argument frequently proffered by supporters of the Septuagint bible is a verse in Genesis 25:8 which states that [the 175 year old] Abraham “died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years…”. This biblical claim is hard to square with the [Masoretic] reality shown in Table 2 where Abraham would have ‘grown up with’ and ‘witnessed’ the deaths of as many as 6 patriarchs all of which lived to be [many hundreds of years] older than 175! Using the Masoretic chronology Abraham would have been neither “an old man” nor “full of years” compared to the world around him. In the Septuagint chronology, as the argument goes, Noah had been deceased for nearly 800 years, Shem for about eight centuries, Eber for about four centuries thus is a much better fit with the claim that Abraham lived to an ‘old’ age.  Note however while this verse remains as a strong argument against the Masoretic Genesis 5 & 11 [numbering] version it also does not fully support the Septuagint where Abraham witnessed his father Terah living to 275 and Nahor his grandfather to age 304.

In summary we must conclude the Septuagint [again] seems to be a better fit than the Masoretic case however neither adequately support this verse [claim]. 

6.  CONCLUSIONS AND AUTHOR’S NOTES

The over-arching theme we see from our analysis in comparing a Masoretic or Septuagint world for the time period of Adam to Abraham using the Genesis 5 & 11 numberings shown in Table 1 is that ‘most’ of the early biblical events like the Flood, Tower of Babel, and figures like Nimrod, Shem, Ham, Japheth [founding of nations], for a Septuagint version is ‘centered’ more or less on a period, ‘3000 BC’, that [mostly] precedes written history or verifiable archelogy thus can neither be proven nor disproven. A Masoretic world [used by modern Christians and Jews] centered on ‘2000 BC’ however is a period where history as well as archeological evidence is ample, thus biblical history [must] now agree or disagree with the existing extra biblical facts. To this end, with the exception of reconciling a “2000 BC era”  flood, the Masoretic - derived numbers for the most part agree with both biblical scripture [canon] as well as apocrypha such as Book of Jasher and Talmud. Still, both Masoretic or Septuagint chronologies have their strengths and weaknesses with the Masoretic version perhaps best surviving the scrutiny of extra biblical history.

As a final note it is critical to put into context that this analysis, using Genesis 5 & 11 numbers, only pertains to a ‘very early’ period from Adam to birth of Abraham in 1813 BC [Masoretic] or 2166 BC [Septuagint] where history is sparce and “error margins” are greatest.  To be clear, the more recent Old Testament history as far back as 900 BC has been verified by archeology, C-13 dating, and written history- biblical figures and wars for example; Ahab King of Israel [c. 874- c. 853 BC], Ahaz King of Judah  [c. 732- c. 716], Jehu King of Israel [c. 841- c. 814], and literally 100s more biblical figures and events have been verified up to and including the periods where both theologians and secular scholars can agree, dates for example from Xerexes I King of Persia [486-465 BC],  Cleopatra Queen of Asia [126–121 BC] and on and on in the bible through the final last fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Given this level of veracity is it then the errand of logic, science, history, or even basic human reasoning to claim earlier figures such as Noah or Abraham or Nimrod are myth? Just because no evidence has been found to support them? Where else is a ‘lack of evidence’ proof of its absence? And even if we accept this “flawed” logic that these figures never existed where do we draw the line between fact and myth? 2000 BC? 1000 BC? 900 BC? 800 BC? If we have extra biblical support that David lived does not logic suggest his biblical claimed father Solomon and wife Beersheba also existed? Despite a lack of evidence? And if David and Solomon existed why not Abraham or Nimrod or Noah? A scientific theorem is proposed because it fits “some” observed data. It is only proved false or subject to revision after it is disproven by a fact not because of the absence of such a fact. Is not then the bible our best “primary” historical source and as such should we not be accepting all as truth until “disproven” as opposed to assigning the claim as myth “first”?  In summary, whether a theologian, bible critic, impartial historian, or a scientist like mysef, the Bible has “earned” its status to be accepted “first as truth until disproven” rather than “first as myth until “proven”.