Timeline for Noah's Flood, Genealogies, Etc.

[DBowling]

On #2 though, I don't agree with a covenant people idea, nor do I see any need for it. It seems kind of plucked out from nowhere to me.

It's not plucked out of anywhere but Scripture.
The story of the OT is the story of God's relationship with his covenant people, and the person at the head of the genealogical line of God's covenant people is Adam. God made specific covenants with different people and their descendants along the line, but it all started with Adam (who Luke 3 refers to as "the son of God")

There's no way to make it fit that Adam and Eve were like singled out of humanity rather than being the first of God's human creation.

There are a number of hints in Genesis that indicate that the scope of humanity extended beyond Adam's descendents.
The famous question of "who was Cain's wife?" is one of a number of examples. And of course the much debated "sons of God" and "daughters of men".

So I think there are a number of Scriptural indicators that support the premise that Adam and Eve were not the first of God's human creation.

[Kurieuo]

This thread somewhat diverged from the original topic quite deeply. So I split the posts when it diverged into a new thread here: Did All Humans Come From Adam & Eve? (which also contains my reply to DBowling's previous post).

That way, this thread can continue on same path of the opening post which was about the timeline for Noah.

[Nodist]

Well I'm going to try and bring a different perspective to this discussion. First off there was no man or woman until God created Adam and Eve although there were man-like creatures before this that existed.We know both hominids and Neanderthals existed but often time this evidence is looked at from an evolution perspective which I don't do. I do not look at the evidence from an evolution perspective,instead I first try to go by what the bible says and then try to see if there is evidence to back it up.

The bible tells us that God created Adam and Eve and so this means they were new creations of God,however we have hominids and Neanderthals that are often seen as creatures man descended from and I think this causes a flawed view of the evidence. We simply had man-like creatures in the former world that were not man and then after the regeneration of the heavens and the earth in the six days God created Adam and Eve. I see no problem with this interpretation both biblically and scientifically,but I'm not at all influenced by evolution. This does not mean there are no problems to confront just like with the other interpretations that run into issues they are confronted with.It is no different with this interpretation.

Some issues are that scientists have found human DNA in Neanderthals and so it can imply they were related,but it does not really prove it.There is a lot of debate and disagreement even amongst scientists themselves but since they are looking at everything from an evolution perspective it is easy to just say they are related. However,there are other explanations like fallen angels tampering with DNA in Genesis 6 or going after strange flesh. If they tampered with DNA in Genesis 6 or went after strange flesh then why couldn't they have done it in the former world also?

Another problem is the Greenland ice sheet that is at least 100,000 years old,but this does not necessarily disprove a gap.

Now once we confront these issues we are set and are going by the bible and science. And now we can say that Noah's flood effected this world approximately 5000 years ago.

My beliefs mirror these in evolutionist terms. I do not ascribe to evolution as being "change within genetic diversity". Change within genetic diversity, is rigidly based on the codex of the helix structure of DNA, and the specified patterns that prevent cross-species genetic mixes or transformation mutation (unless altered by manipulation) from one species or phylum into another. And I believe that no matter how long a time expanse this constant will not change. Id Est: A goat can become a ram, ibex, antelope, deer, sheep, cow, wildebeest. But a goat will never become a cat. A cat will be any order of variant felines. Birds will become innumerable birds, but everything "after its kind" as it states in the Bible.

I believe there is and advanced ape line that is not humanity's. Erectus and Heidelbergensis, are clearly the product of that line, because of skeletal similarity. But the Human skeleton is so different that there is hardly any comparable continuity. Neanderthal is said to be a cross by some, and by other to be genetically linked to the Erectus line. But I disagree. When I look at human and Neanderthal skeletons I do not see what most anatomists and paleoanthropologists do. I see evident resemblances, and then there is the DNA similarity. I think what you're looking at is opposite to what we consider truth about the two. I think they build a case for the difference in pre-flood longevity and post-flood frailty.

http://www.amendez.com/NAES/Noahs_Ark_A ... gevity.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lktmmd7YnD8

We do not mature like we did in antiquity, because we rarely live past 100. we die with frail baby bones, weakened by our irradiated environmental conditions and our toxic dietary habits, we mutate into deformity more often then ever because our genetic stock is weakened. Hormonal food additives, and drug abuses also play a role in deformity, and we are extended deeply into racial groups from long periods of regional isolation in sedentary communities. Inbred, on a macrogenetic level. Unlike the nomadic, transient Hebrew races who originated in the Fertile Crescent, as caravan drovers to the Sumerian kings. Who went east and west following the Euphrates or south along the coasts to Egypt, from one region to the next, finding mates along the routes of varying peoples, to keep them more viably sound. And extending the first true multi-regional empires.

On the topic of the flood: I think the flood was 1,600 years after Seth was born, thousands of years before Abram. And the age from the time of the gaining of the: "knowledge of good and evil", to today is roughly 14,600 years. The ages in the Bible span about 6,000 years. The Old Testament: 4,000 years from Adam to the Rededication of the Temple. And 2,000 years later the birth of Christ. It's been 2,000 years (roughly) since Christ's life and resurrection. But the Earth could be vastly more ancient. But there is a gap of how many ages were between Noah and Abram.

Age of the Earth: If we say that it was indeed created in the 7 days it took God to make it. Then he created Man on what, the 6th day? Or there about? Then he said to him: "go forth, be fruitful and multiply." Are we assuming Moses meant for us to assume they obeyed him? Or did they disobey his first commandment? Or are the Popes right, and God commanded them to commit sexual sin? No, it wasn't sinful, yes, they did multiply and God saw that it was good. Who can guess how long a period of time passed before the sin at the tree of Knowledge. Well at least 100 years. Adam was numbered at 130 when he begot Seth.

We know this, there can be upwards of 4 generations born in 100 years today, and we don't know they had any children, but they might have had many, and must have had at least 1 boy and 1 girl. After the commandment to multiply they sinned, then, Cain was born. This was after the fall from grace, not in the happy garden life before. And Cain slew Abel, was cursed, exiled: "and Cain took a wife, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden".

Who was she?
Where did Nod come from?

This is where I build my case. Cain was not the first child of Adam & Eve. He was first born under the yoke of sin. He did not marry his sister, he married a descendant of Adam & Eve, a cousin. When God kicked Man out of Eden, he kicked "Man" out, not just two people. And in the hundred or so years after the first people Cain was born.

Anyway not relevant to the age, nor do we know how long a time 7 days are with God. Or do we?

"one day with God, is as a thousand years" isn't it?

So say creation was at least 7,000 years long. So here is an ideological quagmire for those who know its not recommended, but can't help pondering endless ideologies. If 1 day is as a thousand years, and man was created on the 6th day, then doesn't that mean 1 millennium in Eden before Cain was born? In that case, Nod, was well established by then. And this is where I get my figure of 14,600 years.

And on a side note. I think we have roughly 1,000 years left until the final tribulation. Based on the principle of 3. 3 Part's of God, 3 Part's of Man, 3 Day's till resurrection, 3 thousand years from the ascension or 3 days with God until the final trump. Lest these day's be shortened.

[abelcainsbrother]

Well I'm going to try and bring a different perspective to this discussion. First off there was no man or woman until God created Adam and Eve although there were man-like creatures before this that existed.We know both hominids and Neanderthals existed but often time this evidence is looked at from an evolution perspective which I don't do. I do not look at the evidence from an evolution perspective,instead I first try to go by what the bible says and then try to see if there is evidence to back it up.

The bible tells us that God created Adam and Eve and so this means they were new creations of God,however we have hominids and Neanderthals that are often seen as creatures man descended from and I think this causes a flawed view of the evidence. We simply had man-like creatures in the former world that were not man and then after the regeneration of the heavens and the earth in the six days God created Adam and Eve. I see no problem with this interpretation both biblically and scientifically,but I'm not at all influenced by evolution. This does not mean there are no problems to confront just like with the other interpretations that run into issues they are confronted with.It is no different with this interpretation.

Some issues are that scientists have found human DNA in Neanderthals and so it can imply they were related,but it does not really prove it.There is a lot of debate and disagreement even amongst scientists themselves but since they are looking at everything from an evolution perspective it is easy to just say they are related. However,there are other explanations like fallen angels tampering with DNA in Genesis 6 or going after strange flesh. If they tampered with DNA in Genesis 6 or went after strange flesh then why couldn't they have done it in the former world also?

Another problem is the Greenland ice sheet that is at least 100,000 years old,but this does not necessarily disprove a gap.

Now once we confront these issues we are set and are going by the bible and science. And now we can say that Noah's flood effected this world approximately 5000 years ago.

My beliefs mirror these in evolutionist terms. I do not ascribe to evolution as being "change within genetic diversity". Change within genetic diversity, is rigidly based on the codex of the helix structure of DNA, and the specified patterns that prevent cross-species genetic mixes or transformation mutation (unless altered by manipulation) from one species or phylum into another. And I believe that no matter how long a time expanse this constant will not change. Id Est: A goat can become a ram, ibex, antelope, deer, sheep, cow, wildebeest. But a goat will never become a cat. A cat will be any order of variant felines. Birds will become innumerable birds, but everything "after its kind" as it states in the Bible.

I believe there is and advanced ape line that is not humanity's. Erectus and Heidelbergensis, are clearly the product of that line, because of skeletal similarity. But the Human skeleton is so different that there is hardly any comparable continuity. Neanderthal is said to be a cross by some, and by other to be genetically linked to the Erectus line. But I disagree. When I look at human and Neanderthal skeletons I do not see what most anatomists and paleoanthropologists do. I see evident resemblances, and then there is the DNA similarity. I think what you're looking at is opposite to what we consider truth about the two. I think they build a case for the difference in pre-flood longevity and post-flood frailty.

http://www.amendez.com/NAES/Noahs_Ark_A ... gevity.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lktmmd7YnD8

We do not mature like we did in antiquity, because we rarely live past 100. we die with frail baby bones, weakened by our irradiated environmental conditions and our toxic dietary habits, we mutate into deformity more often then ever because our genetic stock is weakened. Hormonal food additives, and drug abuses also play a role in deformity, and we are extended deeply into racial groups from long periods of regional isolation in sedentary communities. Inbred, on a macrogenetic level. Unlike the nomadic, transient Hebrew races who originated in the Fertile Crescent, as caravan drovers to the Sumerian kings. Who went east and west following the Euphrates or south along the coasts to Egypt, from one region to the next, finding mates along the routes of varying peoples, to keep them more viably sound. And extending the first true multi-regional empires.

On the topic of the flood: I think the flood was 1,600 years after Seth was born, thousands of years before Abram. And the age from the time of the gaining of the: "knowledge of good and evil", to today is roughly 14,600 years. The ages in the Bible span about 6,000 years. The Old Testament: 4,000 years from Adam to the Rededication of the Temple. And 2,000 years later the birth of Christ. It's been 2,000 years (roughly) since Christ's life and resurrection. But the Earth could be vastly more ancient. But there is a gap of how many ages were between Noah and Abram.

Age of the Earth: If we say that it was indeed created in the 7 days it took God to make it. Then he created Man on what, the 6th day? Or there about? Then he said to him: "go forth, be fruitful and multiply." Are we assuming Moses meant for us to assume they obeyed him? Or did they disobey his first commandment? Or are the Popes right, and God commanded them to commit sexual sin? No, it wasn't sinful, yes, they did multiply and God saw that it was good. Who can guess how long a period of time passed before the sin at the tree of Knowledge. Well at least 100 years. Adam was numbered at 130 when he begot Seth.

We know this, there can be upwards of 4 generations born in 100 years today, and we don't know they had any children, but they might have had many, and must have had at least 1 boy and 1 girl. After the commandment to multiply they sinned, then, Cain was born. This was after the fall from grace, not in the happy garden life before. And Cain slew Abel, was cursed, exiled: "and Cain took a wife, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden".

Who was she?
Where did Nod come from?

This is where I build my case. Cain was not the first child of Adam & Eve. He was first born under the yoke of sin. He did not marry his sister, he married a descendant of Adam & Eve, a cousin. When God kicked Man out of Eden, he kicked "Man" out, not just two people. And in the hundred or so years after the first people Cain was born.

Anyway not relevant to the age, nor do we know how long a time 7 days are with God. Or do we?

"one day with God, is as a thousand years" isn't it?

So say creation was at least 7,000 years long. So here is an ideological quagmire for those who know its not recommended, but can't help pondering endless ideologies. If 1 day is as a thousand years, and man was created on the 6th day, then doesn't that mean 1 millennium in Eden before Cain was born? In that case, Nod, was well established by then. And this is where I get my figure of 14,600 years.

And on a side note. I think we have roughly 1,000 years left until the final tribulation. Based on the principle of 3. 3 Part's of God, 3 Part's of Man, 3 Day's till resurrection, 3 thousand years from the ascension or 3 days with God until the final trump. Lest these day's be shortened.

Thanks for the reply.I realize that there are people who accept evolution and have found a way to make it fit into scripture and it can be convincing but there is a reason that I personally refuse to look at the evidence in the earth from an evolution view-point. Now you must first realize that my rejection of evolution has nothing to do with my faith in God,I would reject evolution even if I was an atheist.But since I realized that there is no credible mechanism for how life evolves I looked around and found a creation theory/interpretation that takes much of the very same evidence evolutionists use but we just come to a totally different conclusion about what the evidence is telling us. Based on the Gap Theory biblical interpretation there was a former world that existed before God made this world now,but it perished after Lucifer and a third of the angels rebelled against God,judgment was poured out on the former world but unlike in Noah's flood,all life perished in this judgment for a gap of time until God made this world and the life we now have in this world.

So if we accept this we need to find evidence that confirms this interpretation and we do. We find more dead life in the earth than all life presently on the earth now and so there is noway we can make it fit into a 1500 year period between Adam and Eve and Noah's flood.It just cannot be done eventhough young earth creationists are forced to make it fit. But we do find evidence for a former world that perished. Not only the life that we can see that lived in it,but even the tree and plant life was different from the kind of tree amnd plant life we have in this world. So based on this we have confirmation of this interpretation based on the evidence. It might be alot simpler than looking at it from an evolution view point but regardless we have evidence in the earth tjhat confir,ms this biblical interpretation and it works based on Occam's Razor.

Now that I look at the evidence from a former world that perished perspective I can say that you must make evolution fit into this evidence if you accept evolution when you don't even know if life evolves.So this makes much more sense to me and it confirms this biblical interpretation correct.And we can still say that God made this world and the life we have in this world about 6-10,000 years ago at the time of younger drya based on the kinds of life that we see that died like Wooly Mammoths,Mastadons,Giant Elk,Giant sloths,etc compared to the life we have in this world.It is different kinds of life.

Now I know that looking at it from an evolution view-point you must always claim atleast some life survived the exctinction events so that life can evolve but not if you don't look ayt the evidence from that perpstecive. We can see in the geologic record of times when one kind of life died out and then it is like new and totally different kinds of life appeared on the scene,such as the exctinction of reptiles and then the rise of mammals.Evolutionists without even knowing if life evolves will claim the reptiles evolved into the mammals but we could just as easily claim God created different kinds of life at certian times and be just as relevent.

I mean atheists will claim it is "God did it" but they are just replacing God with natural selection and mutations,but have no evidence that even confirms these things are real and causes life to evolve,so that it is a check-mate moment and comes down to which we choose to believe based on the same evidence.

[Ian7759]

Many random thoughts:

- The ONLY way that the death of the entire earth's population of humans was possible, was if, at the time of the flood, they were all gathered within the parameters of one region.

- If Noah's flood was only 5,000 - 10,000 years ago, then it doesn't appear possible that the flood could be global, as we have evidences of civilizations flourishing, far earlier, and with continuity, and with no catastrophic evidences of them being wiped out.

Genesis 3:20 is very interesting:

ESV: "The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living."

NIV: "Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living."

The King James and the NASB pretty much parallels the ESV translation. "Was" she the mother of all of a particular line (Christ's!) living at one later time in history? Or of ALL people, across ALL time? Let's not forget, that when this was written, A) It's after the flood and B) is being written as long-past history, at the time of Moses.

If ALL of humanity was wiped out, it could be that Eve was not the mother of all humanity that may have preceded Adam, that was wiped out, but only mother of the line (God's line!) that would eventually survive from those on board Noah's ark - IF the flood truly destroyed ALL humans everywhere. Remember, it would appear that not before Genesis 3:16 did Adam realize that he would have offspring, upon God telling Eve, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children." Another interesting thing: Eden was not the entire world. In fact, the garden only took up an area with Eden, and in the "east" - east of WHAT? So, IF there were other humans, created long before Adam and Eve, it is entirely possible that Adam was not aware of them, if his reason for naming her Eve (related by Moses) was because she would "become" the mother of all the living - at least if the NIV translation is the more accurate one. So, the name Eve may have been given as a prophetic symbolism to Adam's future.

An interesting question: Would Adam not have named Eve upon receiving her from God? Did he just call her “Hey, you?” What? Also, is “Eve” perhaps the second name for Eve – maybe Adam just called her “woman” for a bit – she had to know he was referring to her – no other chicks around, haha: Genesis 2:23: “She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” Is that just a name for her gender and physical source? The name Eve appears to come later. Or is the sequence of events as it would seem? Genesis 2 seems to indicate that Adam was created and THEN placed in the Garden (God had ALREADY planted?). The text refers to the man God “HAD” formed – does that indicate Adam was formed before the Garden? Where was Adam before the Garden?

If the ESV/NASB/King James translation of the Genesis 3:20 passage is more accurate, it would seem that God inspired Adam to make a prophetic statement in naming Eve the mother of ALL humanity that would eventually spring from her - as there were yet no children born. It would seem Adam named her immediately after having received her from God. However, IF there were other humans - and THAT line (which would not have been God's line), it is likely Adam didn't know of them - as He was isolated in a Garden, somewhere in Eden. Is Moses referring to Eve as the mother of all living - AT THE TIME - or is he referring to all people ever created?

Back to the Genesis verbiage and the question to whether it is sequential in time:

DID Adam and Eve already have children when they sinned, because we see a curious word in God's stated punishment for her (ESV / NASB): God tells Eve He will surely “multiply” her pain in childbearing. Huh – as in, more pain than in her PAST childbearing???!!! And IF the sequence of Genesis 3:20 is correct, it would appear that Eve received her name after the Fall – because it is mentioned immediately after the punishments for their sin are detailed, per the statement about Eve receiving her symbolic name. Of course, again, this is Moses giving history, a long time away from Adam, in the distant future. It's likely not sequential. But that God tells Eve of an “increased pain” (in childbirth) seems a warning – if she had not yet had children, how would she have understood that the pain would be worse – worse than WHAT? WHEN? Before???!!!

And, we also have the NIV translation of Genesis 3:20, stating that Eve would "become" the mother of all the living - seeming to indicate that, when named, Eve had not yet become a mother AND there were no other humans - or her children ("all of the living") would result in a long Godly line. And yet, we still see that God says her child pains will "multiply." The NIV says only that her pains will be "very severe." Of course, we're still back to the basic question: WAS there a previous line of humans, created long before Adam and Eve's time? What portion of humanity was Eve the mother of? And when did they live (that humanity referred to)? Then? All til now? A line?

Sorry for "typing out loud" - I'm sure there are many posts on this stuff.

Wow, fascinating thoughts comparing the various translations, you've made me think about this once again . As if it isn't enough for me to jog my beleaguered brain on the approximate date of Noah's flood, that I have now modified from 42K ago to more like 22 K ago, which would be a few thousands years prior the beginning of the younger dyrass, that was used by God to help modulate the climate for humans so that mass agriculture could be undertaken. This occurred after God removed the curse from the earth as recorded in Genesis. And that is exactly what occurred based on findings in the Levant going back to 17K ago. Thanks for the thoughts and keep going ! ~Ian