Noah's 500

[duxrow]

:typing: Wondering..
In the U.S. we've gone from horse and buggy to space travel in about 500 years --
ever since Columbus set out, until the present day of satellite traffic.

Just imagine if that same 500 years had begun with the birth of Noah... remember he didn't have the 3 sons (no daughters) until his 5th century, and then it was still another hundred before 'the rains came'.

Genesis5:32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. 6:13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. 7:6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.

120 years for the days of man -- 3x40 - and then we see the life of Moses divided into three 40 year periods.

Have you ever wondered about the Lifetime of Noah, and what conditions were like in those pre-Deluge days? We don't know, of course, but has someone perhaps written a book about it that escaped my notice? :eek:

492

[Richard Amiel McGough]

:typing: Wondering..
In the U.S. we've gone from horse and buggy to space travel in about 500 years --
ever since Columbus set out, until the present day of satellite traffic.

I would say that the horse and buggy era began to end with the invention of steam locomotives in 1803 (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blrailroad.htm), and didn't fully end until the invention and popularization of the automobile (1806 - 1927 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_automobile) or so). So I would say that we went from horse and buggy to present day technology in about one hundred years.

I'm fascinated by the question of what comes next. I plan on starting a thread to discuss this. I want to look back over the last hundred years of technological innovation and speculate about what the "next big thing" might be.



120 years for the days of man -- 3x40 - and then we see the life of Moses divided into three 40 year periods.

That's right -



The Life of Moses: 12 = 3 x 40


At 40 Moses fled Egypt (Acts 7.23, 30)


At 80 Moses returned to rescue Israel (Exodus 7.7)


At 120 Moses died. (Deuteronomy 34.7)



The alphanumeric structure of the Ten Commandments given by Moses follows a similar pattern:

Commands 1 - 3: = 40 x 443
Commands 4 - 6: = 80 x 353
Commands 1-10: = 120 x 383

The numbers 443, 353, and 383 are all prime.

They are the value of The Word (Ho Logos = 443), Eternal Light (Aur Olam = 353) and For an Eternal Light (L'Aur Olam = 383).

I explain all this in my article called The Holographic Decalogue (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_TenC.asp).

http://biblewheel.com/images/TenC.gif




Have you ever wondered about the Lifetime of Noah, and what conditions were like in those pre-Deluge days? We don't know, of course, but has someone perhaps written a book about it that escaped my notice? :eek:

492
There wasn't really a flood, so it doesn't make any sense to speculate about life being different in the "pre-Deluge days." We know this because we can look at all the natural history recorded in the rocks, antarctic snow pack layers, etc. Plants and animals have been living and dying on this planet for millions of years.

[duxrow]

Plants and animals have been living and dying on this planet for millions of years.
:anim_32:
Agree's with my theology, too, Richard. Because of the word "replenished" to Adam, and how the world was w/o form and void (tohu va bohu), I have no problem with believing in dinosaurs and neanderthals. Isa45:18. But about a book--maybe in Chinese?? :yo:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

:anim_32:
Agree's with my theology, too, Richard. Because of the word "replenished" to Adam, and how the world was w/o form and void (tohu va bohu), I have no problem with believing in dinosaurs and neanderthals. Isa45:18. But about a book--maybe in Chinese?? :yo:
That doesn't work for me because the word "replenish" is a mistranslation of the Hebrew. The word used there is simply mala = fill. The KJV is the only version that translates it as "replenish" as far as I know.

And the fact that the text says the original creation was "tohu v'bohu" doesn't imply anything about a hidden multi-million year gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. That's pure invention without any support in Scripture as far as I can tell.

There are some Chinese characters that have an intriguing connection with the Genesis story. I don't know what to make of that.

[duxrow]

That doesn't work for me because the word "replenish" is a mistranslation of the Hebrew. The word used there is simply mala = fill. The KJV is the only version that translates it as "replenish" as far as I know.
Works for me--that's my favorite version!
And the fact that the text says the original creation was "tohu v'bohu" doesn't imply anything about a hidden multi-million year gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. That's pure invention without any support in Scripture as far as I can tell.
Fits with something in 2Pete, and agree's with what archeologist say today.There are some Chinese characters that have an intriguing connection with the Genesis story. I don't know what to make of that.
Shucks, was hoping for some tall tale with a link to that pre-Noah era.

:sBo_reflection2:Noah's Ark was 3 stories, 300 long x 30 high (50 wide: jubilee?)
Gen6:14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. 6:15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. 6:16 A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.

Was wondering whether Noah may have been using some kind of power tools to work on that Gopher Wood? Am thinking they weren't really cavemen, but might have even been smarter than today's P.H.D.'s -- You think?:winking0071:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

That doesn't work for me because the word "replenish" is a mistranslation of the Hebrew. The word used there is simply mala = fill. The KJV is the only version that translates it as "replenish" as far as I know. Works for me--that's my favorite version!




How can a mistranslation "work" for you? Don't you understand that "mistranslation" means that it's wrong?




And the fact that the text says the original creation was "tohu v'bohu" doesn't imply anything about a hidden multi-million year gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. That's pure invention without any support in Scripture as far as I can tell.
Fits with something in 2Pete, and agree's with what archeologist say today.




Yes it agrees with science, but not the Bible.




:sBo_reflection2:Noah's Ark was 3 stories, 300 long x 30 high (50 wide: jubilee?)
Gen6:14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. 6:15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. 6:16 A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.

Was wondering whether Noah may have been using some kind of power tools to work on that Gopher Wood? Am thinking they weren't really cavemen, but might have even been smarter than today's P.H.D.'s -- You think?:winking0071:
First, having a Ph.D. does not imply intelligence. Lot's of dummies got degrees.

And I'm quite sure that the folks living a few thousand years ago were just as "smart" as modern folk. They just didn't have the advantage of knowing modern science.

As for power tools - that seems pretty unlikely since they left lots of stuff laying around, but no power tools.

[duxrow]

How can a mistranslation "work" for you? Don't you understand that "mistranslation" means that it's wrong?
Strictly depends on who says it; i.e. where that info comes from..

Yes it agrees with science, but not the Bible.
2Pe:3:5: For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe:3:6: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

First, having a Ph.D. does not imply intelligence. Lot's of dummies got degrees.
Some call 'em Post Hole Diggers:lol:

And I'm quite sure that the folks living a few thousand years ago were just as "smart" as modern folk. They just didn't have the advantage of knowing modern science.

Maybe had something better? But that's probably just wishful thinking about Easter Island..As for power tools - that seems pretty unlikely since they left lots of stuff laying around, but no power tools.
:plane:
The 2nd Ark was the basket carrying baby-Moses, and the 3rd Ark (of Testimony) was carried on the shoulders -- until they finally got it to the Jordan River.:thumb:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

How can a mistranslation "work" for you? Don't you understand that "mistranslation" means that it's wrong?
Strictly depends on who says it; i.e. where that info comes from..

:confused:




Yes it agrees with science, but not the Bible.
2Pe:3:5: For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe:3:6: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

Peter was talking about the flood of Noah, not an imaginary gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.




:plane:
The 2nd Ark was the basket carrying baby-Moses, and the 3rd Ark (of Testimony) was carried on the shoulders -- until they finally got it to the Jordan River.:thumb:
And the fourth Ark was Mary who carried Jesus (the Word) just like the third ark (of the Testimony)? That's what the Catholics think.

[duxrow]

:confused:
Peter was talking about the flood of Noah, not an imaginary gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
Ambiguous, I agree, but will still prefer the "Gap" explanation.

And the fourth Ark was Mary who carried Jesus (the Word) just like the third ark (of the Testimony)? That's what the Catholics think.
:woah:
Now that's news--am not Catholic, and this is first time I've heard about any 4th Ark. ha.

Enoch died in 987 AA (after adam), and Noah born 1056, so "69" years between them if my fuzzy math working? Say this just 'cause you're more of a numbers person than I am, and I wonder if you see any pattern here? Like Adam died 70 yrs. short of the 2nd millennium, and so the 69 tween Enoch and Noah caught my eye. ?? :pop2:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Peter was talking about the flood of Noah, not an imaginary gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
Ambiguous, I agree, but will still prefer the "Gap" explanation.

Ambiguous? I don't see any ambiguity at all. Peter was clearly talking about the flood of Noah.

If people can just make up whatever they want and insert it into the Bible, why pretend to take the Bible as an authority?



:woah:
Now that's news--am not Catholic, and this is first time I've heard about any 4th Ark. ha.

You would probably fit in very well with the Catholics. They appreciate the kind of patterns that you have been sharing. They have enshrined the doctrine that Mary was the "Ark of the New Covenant" in their Catechism (the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church). Here's a snippet (http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=6811&CFID=142154123&CFTOKEN=81358234):



When the ark was completed, the glory cloud of the Lord (the Shekinah Glory) covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle (Ex. 40:34-35; Num. 9:18, 22). The verb for "to cover" or "to overshadow" and the metaphor of a cloud are used in the Bible to represent the presence and glory of God. The Catechism explains:
In the theophanies of the Old Testament, the cloud, now obscure, now luminous, reveals the living and saving God, while veiling the transcendence of his glory — with Moses on Mount Sinai, at the tent of meeting, and during the wandering in the desert, and with Solomon at the dedication of the temple. In the Holy Spirit, Christ fulfills these figures [types]. The Spirit comes upon the Virgin Mary and "overshadows" her, so that she might conceive and give birth to Jesus. On the mountain of Transfiguration, the Spirit in the "cloud came and overshadowed" Jesus, Moses and Elijah, Peter, James and John, and "a voice came out of the cloud, saying, 'This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!"' Finally, the cloud took Jesus out of the sight of the disciples on the day of his Ascension and will reveal him as Son of man in glory on the day of his final coming. The glory of the Lord "overshadowed" the ark and filled the tabernacle (CCC 697).

It's easy to miss the parallel between the Holy Spirit overshadowing the ark and the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary, between the Ark of the Old Covenant as the dwelling place of God and Mary as the new dwelling place of God.

God was very specific about every exact detail of the ark (Ex. 25-30). It was a place where God himself would dwell (Ex. 25:8). God wanted his words — inscribed on stone — housed in a perfect container covered with pure gold within and without. How much more would he want his Word — Jesus — to have a perfect dwelling place! If the only begotten Son were to take up residence in the womb of a human girl, would he not make her flawless?

The Virgin Mary is the living shrine of the Word of God, the Ark of the New and Eternal Covenant. In fact, St. Luke's account of the annunciation of the angel to Mary nicely incorporates the images of the tent of meeting with God in Sinai and of the temple of Zion. Just as the cloud covered the people of God marching in the desert (cf. Num. 10:34; Deut. 33:12; Ps. 91:4) and just as the same cloud, as a sign of the divine mystery present in the midst of Israel, hovered over the Ark of the Covenant (cf. Ex. 40:35), so now the shadow of the Most High envelopes and penetrates the tabernacle of the New Covenant that is the womb of Mary (cf. Luke 1:35) (Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, The Shrine: Memory, Presence and Prophecy of the Living God).


They actually make a pretty good case, don't they?



Enoch died in 987 AA (after adam), and Noah born 1056, so "69" years between them if my fuzzy math working? Say this just 'cause you're more of a numbers person than I am, and I wonder if you see any pattern here? Like Adam died 70 yrs. short of the 2nd millennium, and so the 69 tween Enoch and Noah caught my eye. ?? :pop2:
There's no obvious connection to me. I don't have any confidence in the numbers derived from counting genealogies. There are too many uncertainties to have any confidence that anything is correct. For example, only the years are given, so each generation includes an unknown number of months. In just 9 generations, we get a total uncertainty of 9 years in the genealogy:
Genesis 5
3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years + x1 months, and begat Seth:
6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years + x2 months, and begat Enos:
9 And Enos lived ninety years + x3 months, and begat Cainan:
12 And Cainan lived seventy years + x4 months, and begat Mahalaleel:
15 And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years + x5 months, and begat Jared:
18 And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years + x6 months, and he begat Enoch:
21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years + x7 months, and begat Methuselah:
25 And Methuselah lived an hundred eighty and seven years + x8 months, and begat Lamech:
28 And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years + x9 months, and begat Noah

So how many years after Adam was Noah born? To calculate that, we need to add up all the years and the months for each birth. The answer is 1056 years + the sum of all the x months. But we don't know the x months - they can range anywhere from 0 (when a son is born on his father's birthday) to 12 (when a son is born during the month before his father's birthday). Thus, the possible time for the birth of Noah ranges anywhere from 1056 to 1065 years after Adam. It is very unlikely that your number of 1056 is correct because that could only happen if all the sons' birthdays were, on average, within six weeks of their fathers' birthdays. That would be a very unlikely sequence of events. The most reasonable guess therefore is to assume a random distribution with the average of xi = 6 months. So the best answer we can get from the Biblical data is that Noah was probably born 1056 years + 9 x 6 months = 1060.5 years after Adam.

This kinda throws a wrench into any patterns that depend upon the precise number of years in the genealogies. This was one of the more obvious of the many errors Harold Camping made when he invented his "Biblical Calendar of History" that said creation happened in 11,013 BC and the world would end on October 21, 2011. You might have noticed that didn't work out so well. But he was absolutely adamant that he could not be wrong. That his calculations were so solid that to doubt them was equivalent to doubting the Bible. :doh:

If you want to analyze the numerical patterns of the Bible, you need to be mathematically precise.

Garbage in, Garbage out. :chores037:

[duxrow]

:peep:
Gen1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. (IN FLOOD STAGE PRIOR TO THIS..)

2Pet3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

"Letter of the law killeth, but the spirit giveth life".. 2Cor3:6 -- So let us not quibble about the extent of the perishing...OK?

Will have to check later on your catholic, garbage, and numbers comments...:yo:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

:peep:
Gen1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. (IN FLOOD STAGE PRIOR TO THIS..)

2Pet3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

Uh ... did you notice that the Third Day happened after the supposed gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 in which the first "deluge" supposedly happened?

Your attempt to force-fit the idea of a deluge in a gap simply doesn't work. The text says:
2 Peter 3:5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water [after Day 3], 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water [the flood of Noah].

Obviously, the text is not talking about events that preceded the third day. And besides, Peter mentions Noah in the same letter just a few verses earlier:
2 Peter 2:5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;

The "ancient world" refers to the world at the time of Noah, just as the "heavens were of old" and the "world that then existed" refer to the world at the time of Noah.

I am constantly mystified by what motivates people to make up stuff and then believe it as if it were being taught in the Bible.



"Letter of the law killeth, but the spirit giveth life".. 2Cor3:6 -- So let us not quibble about the extent of the perishing...OK?

Your comment is a non-sequitur.



Will have to check later on your catholic, garbage, and numbers comments...:yo:
Sounds good.

[duxrow]

:talk005:
Tks, Richard. I have done teaching on the three Arks being ‘boats’, so adding the Virgin Mary was repulsive at first (not wanting to include her as a boat, even if she hadn’t yet broken water. Ha. As I said, that was the first I’d heard of a 4th Ark.

Further reflection, how that first Ark carried animals and family, and the second Ark just baby-Moses, I was reminded how they were ‘containers’ as well as ‘boats’, and Mary qualifies for that by being a container of the baby Jesus. Like the 3rd Ark being a container of the Tablets, the Manna, and the Rod that budded.

That first Ark (the floating barge or barn), and the second (seagoing baby buggy) traveled on water, but the 3rd (Testimony) was built in the desert (long way from the water..) Now suppose I’ll need to modify my 3-Arks page to include Mary. Or maybe just leave it to the catholics.:winking0071: