Adam to Abraham: The Dating Game



Adam to Abraham (A2A):

The Dating Game


Orthodox Protestants who take Genesis as Historical Narrative (OPGHN, “opgane”) believe the Genesis record gives us a clear chronology from Adam to Abraham. There is no evidence of gaps. [1] Seth named Enosh (Ge 4:26) so he was his direct descendant and not a distant relative. In Jude 14 we are told that Enoch was the seventh from Adam, so no gaps are possible there. Lamech named Noah (Ge 5:29) so he was his biological father and not his great great grandfather.

Arphaxad must be the son of Shem and not his grandson since he was born just two years after the flood. Methuselah’s name means “when he dies it shall be sent” and the year of his death is when the Global Flood started. This shows how accurate and tight the historical chronology from Genesis is – Methuselah could not have died after the Flood!

Adam and Eve lived at the beginning of creation not millions of years later (Mk 10:6). Since the beginning of creation man has been able to see God’s eternal power and divine nature through observing creation (Rom 1:20) – man has existed since the beginning and is not a latecomer in cosmic history. If millions of years really existed before the Flood, scripture could have made that plain. Second Chronicles 14:9 refers to a million man fighting force.

Jacob told Pharaoh that his life so far was short (130 years) compared to his forefathers (Ge 47:9), thus confirming the long ages of the antediluvians (900’s). The Sumerian King List also documents long ages before the Global Flood and a drastic reduction in life spans afterward. The Sumerian King List shows eight kings before the flood and if we don’t include Adam and Noah, this matches the historical chronology from Genesis. The Sumerian system of math was based on 60 instead of the decimal system (base 10). If we convert the life spans of the line of Seth from decimal to base 60 we can see that the Sumerian King List is somewhat close to the actual values from Genesis. For Mahalalel we have 8*3600=28,800 and 9*60=540. The totals for all eight differ by only 5%.

To many, long life spans seem incredible. Just think of the number of dreams Adam had in 930 years. One way to live longer is to avoid disease. A group of dwarfs in southern Ecuador get neither cancer nor diabetes due to their unique genetic makeup.

. . . . Adam lived at the same time as Methuselah, Methuselah lived at the same time as Shem and Shem lived at the same time as Isaac! So Isaac could have verified Shem’s first hand knowledge of the genealogy, Shem could have done the same with Methuselah and Methuselah could have checked his facts from Adam himself! A chronology you can trust from the man made from dust. Adam and Eve had plenty of practice with number theory when they counted the thousands of stars at night. Bookkeeping the “begats” would be no problem for the first Edenite.

From Adam to the Flood is 1656 years. For hundreds of years people could chat with the perfect couple (initially) who once lived in a utopia named Paradise. Both Genesis and Josephus agree that Abraham was born 290 years after the Flood. [2] Abraham could have compared his genealogy with Shem, who was still alive in his time. Abraham is generally considered to be living around 2000 BC. Therefore, the traditional date of creation of around 4000 BC seems correct. The Mayan calendar places creation at 3114 BC which is not that far from the date of 4004 BC given by Ussher.

Some reply that radiometric dating forces a lengthening of the Genesis chronology. The book and DVD “Thousands not Billions” provide decisive evidence that radioactive dating actually supports the Young Earth Science (YES) position. This book, which summarizes the findings of the RATE project includes both scientific and biblical evidence.

All the men named in these genealogies were sinners: “Here’s a word you can take to heart and depend on: Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners. I’m proof—Public Sinner Number One” (1 Tim. 1:15, Message).

–Jay Hall

1) Refuting Compromise by Jonathan Sarfati (Master Books, 2004), pp. 289-297.
2) ibid., p. 291.





Comments are closed.