Shems age
Charles Casey errancy@infidels.org
Sat, 08 May 1999 12:27:46 -0400 (00926198866, 4.1.19990508115404.0091ef00@alpha.wcoil.com)
At 11:55 PM 5/7/99 -0700, you wrote:
>TILL
>I don't like to see skeptics trying to find biblical discrepancies where
>they don't necessarily exist. I'm sure we have all done this at times, but
>I think that this may be an example of trying too hard to find discrepancy.
>Genesis 5:32 says that Noah was five hundred years old and begot Shem, Ham,
>and Japheth. Unless they were triplets, they would not have all been born
>in Noah's 500th year, since the flood story credits him with only one wife,
>and, besides, Genesis 9:24 refers to Ham as the "youngest son." So if Ham
>was the youngest son, this would mean that the names, for some reason were
>not given in their order of birth. Hence, Japheth could have been the
>oldest, who was born in Noah's 500th year. The flood lasted about one
>year, and Genesis 11:10 says that Shem was 100 years old when Arpachshad was
>born TWO years after the flood, so if Japeth was born in Noah's 500th year,
>then Shem could have been born three years later and would have been 97 when
>the flood came in Noah's 600th year. The actual birth order, then, would
>have been Japheth, Shem, and Ham. The translation of the verse is
>controversial, but some versions say in Genesis 10:21 that Japheth was the
>"elder brother" of Shem.
>
>Support for the premise that Noah's sons were not listed in the order of
>their birth can be found in Genesis 11. Verse 26 says that Terah lived 70
>years and begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran, but verse 32 says that Terah then
>lived to be 205 and died in the city of Haran. Since Abraham allegedly left
>Haran when he was 75 (Gen. 12:4), at which time his father Terah was dead
>(Acts 7:4), if he were Terah's first son, who was born when Terah was 70
>(11:26), then he would have been only 135 when he left Haran (if Terah, as
>claimed, was dead at the age of 205 when Abraham left). This would result in
>a discrepancy between Genesis 11:26 and Genesis 12:4, which inerrantists can
>easily resolve by claiming that Terah's sons were not listed in their birth
>order in Genesis 11:26. Terah was 70 when he began to have children, but
>Abraham wasn't the first; he was born when Terah was 130. Then 75 years
>later, when Terah was dead at the age of 205, Abraham left Haran.
>
<snip>
CASEY
I have a concern that sort of relates to the number 40 thread that was
posted to
this list recently. The "Shem's age" issue has caused me to wonder if it
is true
that most, if not all, of the ages of people documented in the bible are in
multiples
of 5.
For example, no one ever seems to be 61 when they died or 73 when they had
a child,
etc. Just look at Till's latest response and you will notice that almost
every number,
(even the ones that are not people's ages), is a multiple of 5.
i.e.
>Noah's 500th year;
>Shem was 100 years old when Arpachshad was born
>Noah's 600th year
>Terah lived 70 years...
>Terah then lived to be 205...
>Abraham allegedly left Haran when he was 75...
>born when Terah was 70...
>he would have been only 135 when he left Haran...
>dead at the age of 205...
> Terah was 70...
>when Terah was 130...
>75 years later...
I'm not referring to calculations made as a result of adding/subtracting
ages, etc., but
rather the ages as specifically documented in the bible. I could be wrong,
but, again, it
just seems strange to me.(?)
Chuck Casey