Karl Kluge Lionel Tun is one of those rare literalists who read the Genesis geneologies in

Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Karl Kluge Lionel Tun is one of those rare literalists who read the Genesis geneologies in the obvious way. Which raises the following problem (repost of an old, old post of mine). L.T. should feel free to offer a detailed realignment of Egyptian history if he feels the conventional dates are in error (and, of course, support it with evidence)...but I wouldn't advise it. Many have tried, and none have succeeded. ********************************************************************* Since this has come up again... I Kings 6:1 says that 480 years passed from the start of the Exodus to the start of construction on the first temple by Solomon. Gal 3:17 says that 430 years passed from the covenant with Abraham to the delivery of the Law to Moses. The first several chapters of Genesis give numbers of years between the births of certain individuals (regardless of whether the relationship is father-son) giving 1656 years from the creation of Adam to the Flood, and 389 or 391 years from the Flood to the covenant with Abraham (depending on how you handle the inconsistency between the age of Seth and the date of birth of his son). The Jews were neither the most literate nor the most extroverted nation in the area, so it isn't too difficult to fix the date of Solomon's building of the first temple -- around 950 BC, it turns out. This means that the Exodus took place c. 1430 BC, the covenant with Abraham c. 1860 BC, the Flood c. 2252 BC, and the creation of Adam (and the Earth for those who believe in 6 literal 24-hour days) c. 3907 BC (not too far from Usher's (sp?) 4004 BC). Unfortunately, there were any number of vigorous, literate cultures in the Near East at the putative time of the claimed global flood, and none of them seem to have noticed it. The Great Pyramid, for instance, was build in the 26th century BC, 300 years before the Biblical date of the Flood. I have a hard time seeing what meaning the concept of inerrency can have if God would allow dates that allow the falsification of the Bible as historical text to become corrupted, and I fail to see any way to escape the very plain language of the geneologies in Genesis. The only rational alternative if one doesn't wish to throw Judaism or Christianity out the window in the face of this problem is to accept that parts of the Bible are (gasp!) myths, that there is nothing wrong or deceitful about the Bible containing myths, and go off and get some understanding of what myths are and what their function is (say, by reading Joseph Campbell or Robert Graves). Karl Kluge (kck@g.cs.cmu.edu) Here's one from the March 1991 _Impact_: "Why should we believe that all species come one from another when no evidence has yet been found to prove that any species came from another?" This is a reprint of a William Jennings Bryan writing from 1925, but the editors (who write a note at the end) do not claim that this statement would now be inaccurate. Rather, they claim that Bryan's words "constitute a strong case against evolution even today." Perhaps John Morris needs to debate the remainder of the ICR on the "fixity" of species and get back to us when they have made up their minds. Further, my recollection (from a year-old _Science News_ article) is that the number of dinosaur _genera_ discovered is constantly increasing, and that there are now about 500. If John Morris wishes to have 100 "kinds" turn into 500 genera in the 2000 years between the creation and the flood, he is quite a radical evolutionist.


E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank