Search Results

Years of rewarding research have revealed with considerable certainty that about 50 names are omitted between Eber and Peleg in Shem’s genealogy (Genesis 11).  This finding dates Noah’s Flood to around 4000 BC and Creation two millennia earlier.  Many arguments supporting this finding are found in chapter 7 of The Hidden Beauty of Hebrew Genealogies: Harmonizing Old Testament Words and Numbers  ( HB ) and are summarized below.  HB  (300+ pages) clarifies how the Bible uses genealogies and has been over 20 years in the making.  It is grounded in the inerrancy of Scripture and stands packed with new ideas.  Author Lloyd Tontz Anderson (1935-Present) welcomes questions/comments/suggestions.  Download the full text for free at Hebrewgenealogies.com .   lloydanderson1935@gmail.com .  Arguments for Missing Generations Finding:   The biblical author intentionally omitted at least 40 and more likely 50 generations between Eber and Peleg in Shem’s genealogy of Genesis 11.  Three profound contrasts between it and Adam’s Pre-Flood list open the door to this revelation.  First Contrast: Longevity .  Pre-Flood longevity did not change.  All seven listed in Adam’s genealogy who died before the Flood lived about 900 years.  All of Shem’s recorded descendants were born after the Flood.  But in contrast, his first three generations lived 438, 433 and 464 years, an average of 445 years.  No listed person born after them lived longer.  Four hundred forty-five is an astonishing 50% decrease from the average Pre-Flood lifespan.  But it is the biblical record, though unnoticed or thought unimportant for 2000 years.  Second Contrast: Maturity .  Arriving at adulthood and beginning families declined by a whopping two-thirds.  The listed Pre-Flood people started families around the age of 100.  The first three Post-Flood generations started families in their 30’s.  Again, the numbers:  ages 35, 30 and 34 for the first three generations in Shem’s line born after the Flood vs 105, 90, 70, 65, 162, 187 and 182 for those in Adam’s line.  HB  removed Adam from this calculation because he was created a mature adult.  It also removed Enoch because he was unique among those born before the Flood.  He did not die.  At the age of 365, God took him to heaven.  Third Contrast:  Declining Longevity .  However, a third kind of longevity change occurred after the Flood as well.  Longevity itself began a gradual decline.  Beginning with an average lifespan of 445 years, this steady decline continued until it stabilized at 70 years.   The total Post-Flood decline was an astonishing 375 years (445 – 70 = 375).  The average decline was four or five years to begin with, but eventually slowed to just several years per generation.  It took around 2600 years for this third kind of longevity contrast to run its course (from the Flood c. 4000 BC to the end of Moses’ life c. 1400 BC).  Yet, the decline between Eber and Peleg was 225 years which is found by subtracting the lifespan Scripture gives for Peleg from the lifespan it gives for Eber (464 – 239 = 225).  This portion of the decline is over 50% of the total decline.  Thus, Post-Flood humans suffered three astonishing changes to human longevity.  Not only was there an immediate 50% decline in lifespans and a two-thirds decrease in reaching adulthood, but a continuous decrease of longevity after the Flood over the next two and a half millennia.   Identifying these three longevity contrasts forces the conclusion that the decline in lifespans between Eber and Peleg is explained by the omission of as many as 50 generations.  How could Bible expositors make such a blunder as to insist Shem’s list had no omissions?  The lifespans of Adam, Enoch, Noah and Shem masked these observations.  Adam was created a mature adult.  Enoch did not die.  To include Enoch in the Pre-Flood average lifespan lowers it by nearly 100 years.  Noah and Shem lived both before and after the Flood—Noah lived 600 years before and 350 after while Shem lived 100 years before and 500 after.  This means they experienced both the forces of the Flood and the new conditions following the Flood as well as the more agreeable Pre-Flood conditions.  Since Noah lived most of his life before the Flood, his longevity was not greatly affected.  If he had lived all his life before the Flood, he could have lived over 1000 years.  Shem, however, lived five-sixths of his life after the Flood so his entire lifespan was greatly reduced from what it could have been if he had lived his entire life before the Flood.  Only by removing Adam, Enoch, Noah and Shem from chronology charts can the full contrast between Pre-Flood and Post-Flood lifespans become apparent.  Years Omitted .  There were no children on the Ark, only four couples.  The lifetimes of the first three generations born after the Flood averaged 445 years.  The next three individuals in Shem’s list, the 4th, 5th and 6th names, lived 239, 239 and 230 years, nearly 50% fewer years than the first three names.  No explanation is given for this enormous decline.  The writer continues as if the reader would understand—he skipped a long list of names as commonly happened in Hebrew genealogies.  How many years does this represent?  Two numbers are needed: the average generation which was 32 years and average decline which was 4.5 years per generation.    Since Peleg lived 225 fewer years than Eber (464 – 239 = 225), about 50 generations were deliberately omitted (225 / 4.5 = 50).  Multiplying those 50 generations by the typical 32 years per generation indicates about 1600 years are missing (32 x 50 = 1600).  Adding those skipped years to the date of Peleg’s birth (2417 BC est.) and the 101 years from the Flood until Eber’s birth gives a Flood date of 4118 BC (2417 + 1600 + 101 = 4118 BC).  In round numbers, the Flood occurred around 4000 BC.  Hangup:   chronogenealogies.  The genealogies of Shem and Adam contain a second feature that blinds inerrancy literalists.  The author states the age of each father when he sired the offspring that continued the reported line.  That number is correct.  It tells when the father begat his immediate son, whether that son is the son named in the text or a skipped son.  Those who insist that number tells when the named son was born have invented a special word for that kind of genealogy.  They call it a chronogenealogy.  But is it such a device?  First, Scripture does not identify it that way.  Second, adding the begetting years is not prescribed by Scripture.  Third, Scripture itself does not sum those years.  Since God was silent on the dates of the Flood and Creation, He apparently had some reason for not supplying such information when the Holy Spirit gave that Scripture.  Times have changed.  Now it is necessary to have a better Flood date.  HB  takes the biblical information that is available now and figures a reasonable range of time from that information.  Anything more verges on putting words in God’s mouth. The chronogenealogists ask, “Why else would God give those birthing numbers?”  Old Testament scholars have suggested other sound reasons which can be read in chapter seven.  They also point to Adam’s list which gives both the years before the birth of the son, the years after and totals them so there would be no uncertainty.  In that case, God summed just two numbers nine consecutive times to assure the reader that those people actually lived that long.  God is perfectly capable of summing the years of the lists if He meant them to be summed. Weighing the Biblical Evidence Four powerful lines of evidence support the finding of missing generations in Shem’s genealogy.  The first line is the textual correction of Exodus 12:40.  Incorrectly understanding this verse, Archbishop James Ussher added the numbers in Shem’s genealogy (Genesis 11) to date the global Flood to 2348 BC and Adam’s list (Genesis 5) to date Creation to 4004 BC.  One hundred years after Ussher, textual scholars corrected Exodus 12:40.  With this correction It read that Israel sojourned in Egypt 430 years.  Today, nearly all English-language Bibles other than those associated with the King James Version read that way.  Since I Kings 6:1 places the Exodus 480 years before Solomon began the temple, the Exodus happened in 1446 BC and the 430-year sojourn began in 1876 BC.  A second major line of evidence is how biblical authors recorded genealogical lines.  Lines were just as correctly recorded whether complete or abbreviated.  For example, in a line the stated son might be the father’s immediate son or any son (descendant) further down the line.  While modern genealogies don’t work that way, such a practice was not considered an error in Hebrew genealogies.   A third major line of biblical evidence (explained above) is that the lifespans of those who lived and died before the Flood did not change while the lifespans of those born after the Flood declined steadily.  The clue to missing generations was that after the first three names in Shem’s list, longevity abruptly decreased by half.  Omitting about 50 names explains that gap.  A fourth major line of biblical evidence is the Ice Age and Job’s vivid memories of it.   While not mentioned above, HB  devotes three chapters (chapters 9-11) to this and additional evidence from the Book of Job.  He and the other speakers, including God, frequently mentioned ice age phenomena.  Because of his 280-year lifespan, his ordeal is logically dated around 2550 BC when the Ice Age was ending.  Since the Flood produced the conditions that brought on an ice age, the Great Ice Age also points to a c. 4000 BC Flood date. Numerous misinterpretations obscure these four lines of biblical evidence pointing to a c. 4000 BC Flood date and a c. 6000 BC Creation date.  Once they are corrected the truth will become obvious and problems with these genealogies will be replaced with a new level of confidence in the integrity of Scripture.

In the last 20 years creation scientists have overturned 200 years of secular efforts to explain God away. They took Lyell’s uniformitarianism to the cleaners with catastrophism, proving that present geological processes do not explain those of the past. They also show that life’s kinds are vastly complex and purposefully designed, not the result of random evolutionary processes. The creative work of God explains the existence of life. His justice explains the large-scale geological changes of Noah’s Flood. Creation occurred about 8000 years ago and the Flood followed about 2000 years later. The Bible is true. Believers owe a huge debt of gratitude to those who have engaged in this research and reported these findings. Now God’s people must address a third issue that derails modern man’s search for God. This new topic is human history which until recently was not a critical subject. Now it is the new torpedo to sink the Bible due to the interpretation that Shem’s genealogy dates the Flood around 2500 B.C. when advanced societies were thriving. Something is wrong. It isn’t archaeology. Neither is it the Bible -- only a misinterpretation of the Bible. Traditionally Bible teachers have added the numbers in Shem’s genealogy of Genesis 11 to determine the date of the Flood. Archbishop James Ussher used this method and concluded the Flood occurred in 2348 B.C. Various corrections to his numbers push the Flood back to around 2500 B.C. But the true date must be earlier, by about 1500 years. When Scripture is correctly interpreted, it does point to an earlier date, but seeing this takes careful study. On the other hand, a single chapter, Genesis chapter one, spells out in clear speech that God created life and the entire universe in six days. In the same way Noah’s Flood is clearly spelled out in Genesis chapters six through eight. Other portions of Scripture repeat and reaffirm what those passages say. In contrast with creation and the Flood, Scripture does not summarize human history in a single chapter or even a few. It must be pieced together from hundreds of OT verses and passages. These references come in three categories—uses of kinship terms, genealogies that skip names and specific reports bearing on the history of mankind. Use of kinship terms. The only way to know how to take such terms as father and son in Scripture is by how Scripture itself uses them. Surprisingly, Scripture uses them in two ways, both the familiar way of a father and his immediate son and in broader senses. For instance, Solomon was an immediate son of David (2 Samuel 12:24). But the very first verse of the New Testament says “Jesus Christ, the son of David.” Clearly Matthew 1:1 uses the term “son” in a wider sense than Solomon being the son of David. How many verses use kinship terms this way? They are so numerous it boggles the mind. Genealogies that skip names. The above observation leads to this second one. Occasionally genealogies omit names. Where this happens a kinship term is used in a broad sense. A careful look at the purpose of genealogies reveals that most of them have to do with building a nation, not determining who would be the next king or high priest. God promised to make a nation with Abraham’s seed. Identity with Abraham in building that nation then became the primary purpose for genealogical lists. Because high priests directed the people to God, it was essential to show they related to Abraham. God selected Aaron as the first high priest and declared that all future priests must descend from him. Four times Scripture gives Aaron’s line beginning with Abraham’s great grandson Levi. Each time it is the same: Levi-Kohath-Amram-Aaron. The first three are immediate father-son relationships. But Aaron was born 300 years after Amram’s birth and Amram only lived 137 years, so in that case, Scripture uses the father-son relationship in a broad sense. This list skips 7-11 names between Amram and Aaron. Beyond question, in at least this one instance, a genealogical list omits names. So far, this author has found 17 genealogies that appear to skip names. These lists can be described as abbreviated or condensed genealogies. David’s list is especially telling. It first appears in Ruth 4:18-22 and follows the pattern of Aaron’s list—three names, then a gap. But because it covers so many years, three more consecutive names are given before a second gap. It concludes with David after a third set of three consecutive names. About 20 names are omitted from that record which is copied in both Matthew and Luke. While Aaron’s and David’s lists make no difference to dating human history, they include a gap or gaps which Shem’s list also does. Like Aaron’s and David’s lists, Shem’s list begins with three consecutive father-son names (Arpachshad-Shelah-Eber) then skips a whopping 35-55 names and resumes with Peleg. This gap makes a huge difference in dating for it places the Flood nearer 4000 B.C. than 2500 B.C. and supplies ample time for the startup of advanced societies in Mesopotamia and Egypt after the Flood. Specific reports bearing on human history. By oversimplifying Scripture, some have concluded that the Flood ended most primary earth movements. This forces nearly all of them into the year of the Flood, overlooks later calamities reported in Scripture, and squeezes the Ice Age into the brief time between 2500 B.C. and Abraham. A 4000 B.C. Flood date allows adequate time for post-Flood earth movements and the Ice Age. A most dramatic earth movement years after the Flood comes with abundant details. The entire nineteenth chapter of Genesis relates how Lot and family fled the opening stages of an earth movement (either the creating or deepening of the Jordan Rift Valley) that turned the Jordan valley paradise into a wasteland and created the Dead Sea. Job 9:5-6 speaks of God removing mountains, overturning them and shaking the earth out of its place so its pillars tremble. Those were major earth movements long after the Flood. Speakers in the Book of Job made constant reference to super hurricanes (produced by the Ice Age). A model of one such storm unleashed up to 300 inches of rain in 18 days and measured 3000 miles in diameter. As a result, permanent vegetation grew in Arabia and the Sahara. Today, without such rainfall, they are desert. One dilemma for the view that all major earth movements occurred during the Flood is how the Ark occupants could descend a 16,000-foot mountain. Scripture states the Ark landed on the mountains of Ararat. Greater Ararat is the highest mountain in that range now. If it reached this height by the end of the Flood, it would have been perilous to descend to the plains far below. Further, the party would have needed repeated trips back up to retrieve all that the Ark carried to restart life. It seems more reasonable to search for clues that some or even many major earth movements happened after the Flood—moving continents and raising mountains through catastrophic processes --but with decreasing energy over the next several thousand years until they reached near stasis. Again, those who have undone uniformitarianism and evolution are to be commended. Now, OT Bible scholars need to assist them by developing a more accurate biblical history of mankind. In doing so each side will help the other in showing the soundness of Scripture. The above 1250 words summarize the central idea of The Hidden Beauty of Hebrew Genealogies—Harmonizing Old Testament Words and Numbers, which can be downloaded for free as a PDF file at Hebrewgenealogies.com.

The following briefly explores what God Himself has revealed about the date of Noah’s Flood. It points to hundreds of verses commonly overlooked by Bible students. The doctrine of inerrancy is paramount in supporting these ideas. First and foremost, biblical genealogies focus on identity with forefathers and descendants, not immediate succession. Matthew 1:1 is one of a multitude of overlooked verses that reveal this truth: “…Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” Because the purpose of this verse is to identify Jesus with David and Abraham, it skips the 60-80 generations succession would require. Numerous genealogical lists like that of Perez-David (Ruth 4:18-22) also omit many generations. Pursuing the identity objective, I Chronicles 4:1 could accurately state “The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, Carmi, Hur and Shobal,” where Perez was the only immediate son. The other four were descendants. The ancient Hebrew language used the various common kinship terms, even “to beget” and “to bear,” in this kind of broad sense as hundreds of verses witness. Long overlooked is the contrast in longevity records before and after the Flood. While charts display a continuous list from Adam to Abraham, none distinguish those who lived and died before the Flood from those born after the Flood. If they did, they would separate out Noah and Shem since they fit neither category. From such a chart, one would immediately see that the first group all lived about 900 years while the longevity of the second group began at just half that. Furthermore, people born after the Flood experienced a continuing decline of longevity. It began with Arpachshad whom Shem fathered two years after the Flood and who lived 438 years. This decline concluded around 1400 B.C. when Moses wrote that a typical lifetime was 70 years (Psalm 90:10). While individual longevity varied, the decline averaged 4-5 years per generation. These numbers are not speculation. God gave them. Anyone can read them. They are not made up. They indicate that the Flood in some way halved the longevity of all who were born to those who got off the Ark and in contrast to pre-Flood folks, their longevities slowly declined. The verses that demand the most careful attention state the decline between the third and fourth names in Shem’s list. It was not 4 or 5 years or even 40 or 50 years, but 225 years from Eber who lived 464 years to Peleg who lived 239 years (Genesis 11:16-19). Peleg did not die prematurely. No one after him in the record lived longer than he did. Something different happened. What? The author skipped over 35 to 55 generations. This was efficient. It saved papyrus or tablets; it spared the reader from a long list of unnecessary names. Most of all, it was typical Hebrew—identity, not succession. It dates the Flood around 4000 B.C. and Creation around 6000 B.C. Do you hear the protests, the questions? Loud. Some are shrill. Only space for one here, the most frequently asked one: “Are the numbers in Genesis 5 and 11 when each father produced a son correct?” Yes, but the son that is named may be the father’s immediate son or a distant “son.” Explore this answer and many others in The Hidden Beauty of Hebrew Genealogies: Harmonizing Old Testament Words and Numbers. (Request free digital copy: lloydanderson1935@gmail.com.)

Stop the Press! Three days after The Hidden Beauty of Hebrew Genealogies: Harmonizing Old Testament Words and Numbers was finally delivered for general public use (Wednesday, January 12, 2022), multiple stories on the Internet reported the discovery of vast numbers of tombs in Saudi Arabia dating between 2600 and 2000 BC.  The tombs line major routes to the north of Medina Arabia between long-established destinations.  These networks are called funerary avenues.  They stretch “for hundreds of kilometers and possibly thousands.”  While they are well known to local residents, archaeologists only recently took serious interest in them.  Over the last year they have counted around 18,000 tombs but expect to spend years pursuing this new field of research and find many more. Walls up to six feet high surround each tomb.  In aerial photographs they are obvious and at times tightly packed together.  The tombs are either round or pendant in shape, and are still standing to their original height.  “The level of preservation is unbelievable,” said one archaeologist.  It is initially thought that the occupants farmed the land nearby and their tombs were placed on the highway so their descendants would remember them.  A similar custom was linked to Greece and Rome in later history.  Since similar tombs are found in Yemen, the avenues may stretch that far.  Why did relatives stop building them around 2000 BC?  The Ice Age had come to an end so the rain it delivered had stopped.  The population had moved away and the land has been a barren, uninhabitable desert ever since. This 4,500-year-old network of highways lined with well-preserved tombs in Arabia joins Ebla’s thousands of written documents dated between 2400 and 2250 BC to verify that civilization was going full tilt when some teach the Flood occurred.  Therefore, the idea found in HB that Moses followed the common Hebrew practice of omitting generations when he recorded Shem’s list can hardly be dismissed.