A Brighter Day Begins with His Word.

John McClintock & James Strong • SECTION 382

Section 382

← McClintock & Strong Cyclopaedia — Volume 2

CHRONOLOGY

298

CHRONOLOar

The attempt to ** correct** or improve the Hebrew chronology by meaiu of the data lately deciphered from the Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions has been a fiiYorite method of late, as was in previous times a similar comparison with the relics of ancient records in heathen authors. But, unfortunately, these state- ments are so discrepant with one another, and the re- sults vary so widely, as to be of very little practical value for such a purpose. The hieroglyphicai data are too firagmentary and disconnected, as well as too uncertainly translated hitherto, to affoid any definite chronological chain ; and the cuneiform legends do not rise so early as the disputed part of Biblical chronolo- gy. See EoTPT ; Amtria.

1. From Adam to Ahram'i departure cmi o/Harai^ — ^All the numerical data in the Bible for the chronol- ogy of this interval are comprised in two genealogical lists in Genesis, the first from Adam to Noah and his sons (Gen. v, 8 to the end), and the second from Shem to Abram (xi, 10-26), and in certain passages in the same book (vii, 6, 11; viU,18; ix, 28,29; zi,82; zii, 4). The Masoretic Hebrew t^ the Septuagint Ver- sion, and the Samaritan Pentateuch greatly difier, as may be seen by the following table, while tiie parallel

causes whatever. As no two of the lists conespond throughout, and as a high degree ci antiquity undonbi- edly belongs to them all, each has had its advocates » I the true originaL The cardinal importanoe of the sub- ject demands a clear, frill, and impartial examinatiflB of the arguments that bear upon their authority seTe^ ' ally, as well as upon the accuracy of particular Bom- bers. As a preliminary, it must be noted that the ts- riations are liie result of design, not accident, as is er- ident from the years before Uie birth of a son and the residues agreeing in their sums in almost all cases i& the antediluvian generations, the exeepdona, save oee (Lamech), being apparently the result of necessity thst lives should not overlap the date of the Flood (ooBp. Clinton, Fatti BeOm. i, 285). We have no dew to tl» date or dates of the alterations, except thai we cm trace the Sept. form to the Ist century of the Cfaristiis ara, if not liigher, and the Heb. to the 4th centoiy; if the Samar. numbers be as old as the text, we csi \ assign them a higher antiquity than what is known u to the Heb. The little acquaintance moat of the esrij , Christian writers had with Hebrew makes it imposn- j ble to decide, on their evidence, that the variation did i not exist when they wrote ; the testimony of Joeq>boi

Patbiabcu.

B«for« Birth of H«ir |

After Birth of H«ir. |

Totel Age.

H«braw.

S»IIIM>.

8«pta.(ln«.

JoMphw.

Hebr.

8.mar. 8«pUi.Kmt.|

H«br.

Sam.

S^t Jc^m.

Adam

130 106 90 70 66 162 66 187 182 600

180 106 90 70 66 62 66 67 63 600

280

206

190

170

166

162

166

187 n«T]

188

600

230 [.S30] 206 [106] 190 170 166 162 (1)66 [187] 187 [171] 182 [S2] 600

800 8U7 816 840 830 800 800 782 666

800 807 816 840 830 785 800 658 600

700

707

716

740

780

800

200

782 [802]

666

980 912 906 910 806 962 866 969 777

980 912 906 910 896 647 866 720 658

930 f uan

Seth

912 906 910

912 [90^ 906 [910]

Q-IA

Bnot

Oalnan

896 f>'>^

Jared

962 866

969 768

909

Enoch

365 969

777 [797]

Luneeh

Noah oieAtf

Flood

(1666)

(1807)

(2262)

(2266)

Noah

(602) 100

(502) 100

(502) 100

(448) 600

(448) 600

(448) 600

-960-

(»50 600

950 )<MA nMfiil

Shem

InUnal ofter Flood . . . Arphixnd

2 86

80 84 80 32 80 29 70 76

2

86

180 184 180 182 130 79 70 76

2

86 180 180 134 180 132 130

79 070]

70

76

12 186 -

180 134 180 130 182 120 a09]

TO [180]

76

408

403 430 203 207 200 119

806

808 270 109 107 100 69

400 [480) 880 830

270 [870] 209 207 200 129 a«6]

206

488

483

404 289 289 280 148 146

906

Cainan

SaUh

Ebcr

p^leff

Ren ,

206

Serug. .•

Nahor

Terah

Abram leaves Hantn

FromtJuFlood

From Creation

(367)

(1017)

(1147)

(1069) 8<J7

(2023)

C2324)

(8809)

(8386) 3575

■- ■: 1

accounts of Josephus (AnL i, 8, 8, and 4, 9 ; 6, 5 ; 7, 1) do not exactly tally with any of them. The Latin Vulgate strictly conforms to the Hebrew. The prin- cipal various readings are given between brackets, and the numbers which are combined from statements in the text are enclosed in a parenthesis. In this pe- riod there are a number of serious difficulties.

(1.) The number of generations in the Sept. is one in excess of the Heb. and Samar., on account of the '^Second Cainan,** whom the best chronologers are agreed in rejecting as spurious. He is found else- where only in some copies at 1 Chron. i, 17, and in Luke iii, 86. Josephus, Pbilo, and the earlier Chris- tian writers appear, however, to have known nothing of him, and it is therefore probable either that he was first introduced by a copyist into the Gospel and thence into the Sept., or else that he was found in some MSS. of the Sept. and thence introduced into the .Gospel, and afterwards into all other copies of the Sept. See Cai- man.

Public-domain 19th-century biblical, theological, and ecclesiastical reference work; OCR text from Internet Archive. Historical scholarship and terminology reflect its era; OCR may contain errors. Verify quotations and current scholarly claims independently.

Project Gutenberg source record →