Genesis genealogy: datings, & Masoretic vs Septuagint

[gnostic]

In another thread of mine: Noah's Flood: local or regional flooding, I got into short converse with datings of the Genesis genealogy with Shermana.

I have webpage called Timeline of the Patriarchs (in Dark Mirrors of Heaven). In this webpage, there are couple of tables.

One of them is a genealogy of Adam to Joseph, with dates. I have includes records from both Masoretic Text and the Greek Septuagint Bible.

With the 2nd table, I showed the timeline of certain events that occurred in the Genesis. My sources for this table is the Masoretic Text. My only problem is that I can neither read Hebrew nor Greek, so I relied on English translations that are available.

I preferred to use the Masoretic Text (English translation, of course), but I don't mind comparing this version with the Septuagint or any other manuscripts that are available. Shermana preferred the Septuagint.

There are notable differences between these 2 versions, especially in the Genesis with age (years) about the some of the patriarchs. Although the age of each life are mostly the same, when each become father is quite different between the 2 texts.

For example, the Masoretic says that Adam was 130 when he became father of Seth, but in the Septuagint it say he was 230. This is a jump of 100 years. The same goes for Seth. Seth was 105 in Masoretic, when he was father of Enosh, but 205 in Septuagint.

Concerning the numbers (age, years) in the Genesis, which of the 2 texts, do you think, is more accurate, or closer to the original? The Septuagint or the Masoretic?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What is it you wish to debate?

 

[gnostic]

I'll answer you, morrow.

It's late. Goodnite.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Good night.

 

[gnostic]

Morning.

What is it you wish to debate?

I'd guess that it is not really debate; it could be a discussion...unless people argue over which text is better. (eg. MT or Septuagint?) It really depends on how the thread go.

With regarding to Genesis, MT and Septuagint showed different years (eg. age of when a patriarch become a father or when he die).

In my webpage that I mentioned in the OP, I had created genealogical timeline for the patriarchs of the Genesis. I am not trying to equate with biblical events with history, as so much as put the timeline in a framework that I can follow. As well as satisfy my curiosity.

However, there are differences between Masoretic Text and Septuagint. So my question is...

I wondering which text is more "correct" or "reliable"? Or which text is closer to the original as possible?

(But only with regards to the YEARS that are written down in the Genesis.)

I know that the Septuagint (or at least the original) was older than the MT, but that doesn't mean it is reliable.

And there are even differences in years in Genesis, between the 2 extant (and more or less complete) Septuagint manuscripts:

• Codex Vaticanus (4th century CE)
• Codex Alexandrinus (5th century CE)

So with manuscripts difference between 2 Septuagints, how do we determine which was more aligned to the original Septuagint?

Do any of other manuscripts match either the MT or Septuagint?

Like the Targum, or Samaritan Torah, or any manuscript that still have Genesis.

Got to go. It's market day, and I usually take my parents for lunch. Be back.

 

[outhouse]

I wondering which text is more "correct" or "reliable"? Or which text is closer to the original as possible?

I dont think anyone can show its not mythology.

with that said, you would need to know when each charactor was created, bit even then, you will never find correct or reliable

 

[gnostic]

I dont think anyone can show its not mythology.

with that said, you would need to know when each charactor was created, bit even then, you will never find correct or reliable

This thread is not for you, because I am not talking about or asking if these characters or events are real, historical or factual. To me, the characters in the Genesis are mythological, but at this thread, I don't care if they are mythological or historical. I am not asking you or anyone if you believe in the stories or not. That's not what it is about.

When I am talking about correctness or reliability here, I referring to what people think the original textual contents. Which of these texts (MT or Septuagint) give us insight to the lost and original book?

Consider this thread on literary analysis or literary criticism, and not a historical-vs-mythological debate. If you can't do this, then I would suggest you find another thread to post.

 

[Vultar]

In another thread of mine: Noah's Flood: local or regional flooding, I got into short converse with datings of the Genesis genealogy with Shermana.

I have webpage called Timeline of the Patriarchs (in Dark Mirrors of Heaven). In this webpage, there are couple of tables.


From Timeline of Patriarchs
At the very least, using the new dates, Jochebed would be 137-year old when she gave birth to Moses. The age of 137 is better than 261 years, but it is still excessive, and improbable.

You find Jochebed being 137 improbable but are "OK" with Noah being over 500 when he had his first child????

And what is with all the incest... you would think there would be enough distant relatives by that time....

Also it seems improbable that there would be enough people for the tower of Babel story being that it was just 174 years after the flood...

Still... very nice compiling work (saves me having to do it - I've bookmarked it for reference) :bow:

 

[Najara]

when the torah was given, yocheved and amram divorced because of incest. if that makes you feel any better lol.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I'd guess that it is not really debate; it could be a discussion...unless people argue over which text is better. (eg. MT or Septuagint?) It really depends on how the thread go. ... I wondering which text is more "correct" or "reliable"? Or which text is closer to the original as possible?

Terms like 'better', 'correct', and 'reliable' are not too useful in my opinion. Seeking to infer transmission details is interesting, and there is a good deal of scholarship dedicated to the topic. So, for example, have your read Emanuel Tov?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This thread is not for you, ...

:clap (almost frubal worthy)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Still... very nice compiling work (saves me having to do it - I've bookmarked it for reference) :bow:

Much of it is, indeed, very nicely done - certainly deserving an A for presentation.

But the facr remains that not too great a deal should be made numbers which are often formulaic and contrived (the multiples of 20 scattered throughout the Tanakh, the ages of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, etc.).

 

[gnostic]

Terms like 'better', 'correct', and 'reliable' are not too useful in my opinion. Seeking to infer transmission details is interesting, and there is a good deal of scholarship dedicated to the topic. So, for example, have your read Emanuel Tov?

I'd guess those terms were not the appropriate ones, when I typed them. I couldn't find the right words to express what I was trying to say.

I was hoping that who was more familiar with both MT and Septuagint (or any other manuscripts/editions) could advise me about those those patriarchs' age or generations of which were closer to the original...if that original Genesis existed.

I am not trying to compare these numbers with parallel historical events or converted to our dating systems (BCE or BC), but more on the literary scholarship. The only historical side I'd want, is the origins of these texts.

So some questions arise:

• Is the Septuagint's list of genealogical years are the results of errors or deliberate embellishments?
• Or is it more accurate than the MT?
• Why do you think so?
• Do other (independent) manuscripts (like DSS or the Samaritan Torah) agree with MT or the Septuagint?

So does these explanation and questions clarify what I want?

No, I have not read any of Emanuel Tov's works, nor heard of him.

 

[Vultar]

Much of it is, indeed, very nicely done - certainly deserving an A for presentation.

But the facr remains that not too great a deal should be made numbers which are often formulaic and contrived (the multiples of 20 scattered throughout the Tanakh, the ages of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, etc.).

It serves to show that the bible is a bunch of made up stories like "Grimms Fairy Tales". So yes the dates are all contrived as they didn't spend enough time to cross reference their own story to see if it was even possible. Also, most of the bible stories fail to teach a moral lesson as well as the fairy tales. The bible rewards evil far too many times... At least in the fairy tales, evil always loses in the end.

_________________

Disclaimer: I don't expect anyone to believe what I write.... I'm just a messenger....

 

[gnostic]

My objective for starting my website Dark Mirrors of Heaven, was to allow people who already know the Genesis, particularly the 1st three chapters (or the 1st eleven), to compare it with other literature, like the Rabbnic Aggadah, the apocryphal or pseudepigraphal literature and Gnostic literature. The site was not created to compare history to biblical events or to refute the scriptures in any way.

It is sort of like comparative religions, but in this site's case, "comparative literature".

 

[gnostic]

I'm currently checking Genesis from the Targum Onkelos. I found a translation at NTCS (The Newsletter For Tarumic and Cognate Studies). I don't know much about the history of the Targum, but it was originally written in Aramaic.

So far, the years matched the MT, with exception of Arpachshad. In MT, Arpachshad died at age 438, while Targum says Arphaxad was 468. This however doesn't seriously affect the calculation in generations, for both versions say that Arpachshad-Arphaxad was 35 when Shelah was born.

I have only check the Targum from Adam to Abraham's birth so far (Genesis 5, 11).

Now, if I can find translations of the Samaritan Torah, Pe****ta, and Vulgate. Too bad that chapters 5 & 11 of Genesis in the DSS is not extant, because that would have been more useful. (It would be great if someone can provide links to translations of any of the above texts.)

 

[Najara]

targum onkelos was written by onkelos. he was a roman convert which was the knephew or son, i forgot this is from the top of my head, of the king at the time and there is a whole story about his conversion. but yea his knew aramaic pretty much like the back of his hand, and he translated the torah into aramaic and became a well known tzadik and scholar in his time which is brought out in the talmud. there is also targum yonoson/yonathan/johnathan which most likely has the same dates recorded.

 

[gnostic]

Last night, found translation for the Samaritan Torah (ST) @ Interlinear Pentateuch.

I was going through it, now. Discover that the generations and ages of the patriarchs in ST are the same MT, from Adam to Mahalalel, Enoch and from Noah to Shem.

Jared (847), Methuselah (720) and Terah (145) were considerably shorter in ST; which mean Methuselah was not the longest living patriarch, Noah was. And instead of being father of Lamech at age 187 (MT), Methuselah was 67 in ST.

And the generations after Shem (being fathers of the next patriarchs) in ST was more like the years listed in the Septuagint (from Arpachshad to Serug).

Perhaps, I will put a new revised table in a new page on my website, at some time later. Especially if I can get a translation of Pe****ta and Vulgate.

 

[LioneDea]

My objective for starting my website Dark Mirrors of Heaven, was to allow people who already know the Genesis, particularly the 1st three chapters (or the 1st eleven), to compare it with other literature, like the Rabbnic Aggadah, the apocryphal or pseudepigraphal literature and Gnostic literature. The site was not created to compare history to biblical events or to refute the scriptures in any way.

It is sort of like comparative religions, but in this site's case, "comparative literature".

Lion D' ea: May I ask brother, are you referring how the creation was happened in Genesis 1:1-3?


(end.)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

No, I have not read any of Emanuel Tov's works, ...

Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible.

..., nor heard of him.

Emanuel Tov