The family of Noah was located west of Ararat after the flood, the civilization from that area sprang up and spread to Ur, Sumer Babylon etc
Asherah came from the root of Asshur and at this early history, the great-grandson of Noah (Genesis 10:
mentions Nimrod as the son of Cush and lists the cities of his kingdom, in the land of Shinar. The Bible speaks of Asshur and his building of cities in the Assyrian area, this Asshur gets confused with Shem's son who was named Asshur.
Asshur is considered to be another name for Nimrod.
Micah 5:6 clears this up and connects Nimrod with Assyria
And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.
Nimrod means “the rebel” similar to the name of the antichrist that is “the lawless one”
So the whole opposition against God was set in motion from the beginning of the birth of civilization (tower of Babel) and Abraham lived in the midst of this.
At some point, we have to consider how bad things were before the flood to cause God to just wipe it all out and start over.
The Bible says there were giants in the land.
It would seem that Ham had a real issue when we look at the picture the Bible paints in detail. Noah listened to God and built the Ark to save his family and one night gets drunk after it's all over-who wouldn't feel like getting snockered?
So he gets smashed and falls asleep butt naked, and Ham sees him and doesn't have the common decency or respect his own Father to just walk over and cover him up, he just goes and blabs to his brothers who have the respect to do what is right.
Seems to me Ham and his sharing of information was his downfall and it is pretty certain he shared stories to his descendants that would have been better left unsaid and it seems to have made a big impact.
Maybe we would not have taken the whole earth being destroyed very well either, but it is apparent that stories of the Anunnaki that caused the birth of the Nephilim made a big impact because this is where the whole Nimrod ideas sprang and where all these God's were created in Mesopotamia and the seed of "Anu" which impacted Ham's descendants.
So the whole early ancient world seems to have been deluged with the stories that occurred pre-flood.
Abraham would have been the most unlikely candidate to be chosen by God because Abraham's Father was a Sumerian Priest, involve in this religion but Abraham rejected all the nonsense.
Abraham and anyone alive at the time would have lived with two prevailing stories that were in conflict, one story that came from Noah himself and others that came from all the pre-flood deities invented by the people through the stories that were shared.
If I were alive at the time, I would have wanted to meet Noah himself and get to the bottom of it and it is certain that Abraham did just that, he never left the area until a few years after Noah died, Abraham was 58.
God protected the timeline through the chain of custody-THROUGH OATH.
From Noah the oath was passed to Shem
From Shem (Melchizedek) the oath was passed to Abraham
From Abraham to Issac
From Issac to Jacob
Then Shem died. Shem was the witness that God kept alive until the Patriarchs were chosen, protecting the whole historical timeline and the chain of custody.
Those that argue that the Septuagint is accurate and that Shem died long before Abraham was born do not see how crucial it was that Shem live until the Patriarchs were chosen. Shem was King and high priest of Salem, the living witness to events of the past and the only one who would have had the authority to correct the historical inaccuracies
Shem needed to witness Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, because they were the types God used to reveal Himself in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
God overlapped lives to protect the historical chain of custody.
We have Bruegel's depiction of the architecture and renditions of the tower of Babel so disputing a painter's rendition of it is not in any way historical.
Of course, it would take millions of people to build the tower that looks like the painting, but the bible doesn't have a multitude of generations alive at the time so the idea of what the tower looked like is interpolated to be this massive tower but not enough generations alive at the time to justify it.
Any claim to how many people were needed to build the structure of the tower is not based on any details given in the Bible, so we are left with Bruegel's depiction rather than the reality of not having this information available.
Nathan makes an error in reasoning and we're left with debating Bruegel's painting.
So any claim of the population needed for the tower is moot, the Bible doesn't give us enough information on the tower to make any claim and the generations born are simply not there to justify millions of people.
Nathan also appeals to emotion with Shem.
"Poor Shem" he witnessed the death of his whole family, children, grandchildren, Friends, etc.. because he lived such a very long life.
Yet Shem witnessed the death of the WHOLE WORLD while on the Ark.
He literally lived through the most traumatic time in history, so claiming anything on emotion is resolved, there are far more important things unfolding and the purpose of your life that was spared goes far beyond simple gratitude.
Shem's life was spared by God for a purpose beyond Shem and certainly Shem more than anyone would have understood the concept more than anyone.
Noah was a Patriarch and chose Shem to succeed him
Nathan doesn't understand there are far more important and crucial foundational issues. God does not leave anything to conjecture and the death of Shem would definitely would have caused a lapse because promises from the time of Noah were passed from one generation to the succeeding according to whom God chose and they passed this through an oath
21(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:)
We can follow the timeline perfectly and it's quite shocking how the Bible confirms it.
From Noah, Shem is in succession to be the Patriarch, he is described as living forever due to his very long life and Shem is a type of Christ as High Priest and we can follow the oath to see where it leads
Shem as Melchizedek blesses Abraham who is the next Patriarch and then follows Issac and then Jacob- THEN Shem dies and what we have next is the betrayal and selling off of Joseph who IS a type of Christ who is a form of Melchizedek - Isn't it awfully convenient that after the Patriarch of the faith -Abraham, Isaac, Jacob have been blessed by oath then a type of Christ appears in the life of Joseph that fills the story up with being betrayed, sold for silver etc.
Having Shem die long before Abraham, breaks the chain of custody and that chain leads straight to Joseph who was used as a type and his life mirrors what occurred during Christ's life, and it is through Jacob that Joseph has this coat of many colors and is itself a type of a Priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.
Shem died before this event happened, but Jacob was alive to actually see the fulfillment of Melchizedek coming into focus and it fits the timeline of the events that Shem die at this time as God is choosing Joseph as a type of Christ, who is
in the order of Melchizedek.- and it ALL Came through the oath, from one proceeding Patriarch to the next.
The fact is the "order of Melchizedek", has an actual order from one to the next.
Not understanding this "order" makes the idea just vague, we don't know what it means if we don't allow types that God has given us to show us the deeper meaning.
God paints a vivid picture in Genesis.
Nothing is missing in the Book of Genesis it has the whole Gospel hidden away and when we follow it, it takes us on an amazing adventure.
There is only one person that can be Melchizedek and that is Shem
Jesus wasn't hanging out as King in Salem and the only other person it could have been would have been Shem, Shem becomes the type of "Melchizedek "
God used Shem, just like he used Joesph to be a type of the Messiah who is Melchizedek
God painted a picture of himself REPEATEDLY..Through the Patriarchs of the Faith.
Abraham who would take his Son and offer him up as a sacrifice and Isacc who was offered and was spared with a ram caught in a thicket and Jacob who loved Rachel (Israel) but ended up with Leah (Gentiles-whom he did not desire) and had to work longer to get his beloved Rachel is the story of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit -
IN FINE DETAIL. Even the fact that Israel did not recognize her Messiah when he came, is locked up in an OT story of Rachel wanting Leah's mandrakes and was even willing to trade her husband Jacob for them- the fact that Jacob is a type of the Holy Spirit in this story takes on a whole new dimension.
Mandrakes is an anesthetic, making you unaware or asleep and that is what occurred to Israel in the NT, she was asleep during her visitation.
When God has completed one portion of the picture he has painted- it moves to the next generation in line and more details are given is finer detail of another person he has chosen to reveal himself
That picture was painted for us with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and THEN Shem dies (Melchizedek) and it is time for the next who WILL be Melchizedek under another type and that is Joseph.
We know who Melchizedek is, he is Jesus Christ, but God chose types to shadow him until the Lord was born and the order of Melchizedek was through oath
From Noah, Shem, Abraham, Issac, Jacob to Joseph and it is the details of Joseph's life that confirm who the Messiah would be and who he was, who suffered, died, rose again, and became second in command over all of Egypt-(Egypt a type of the whole earth) as Jesus KING OF JERUSALEM reigns forever as Melchizedek.
But this really makes no sense if some obscure guy in the OT was Melchizedek
The chain of custody falls apart if it's not and the idea of the blessing passed by oath gets ignored.
Nathan just ignores these issues.
So how does the aegypt timeline line up with the OT then?
Egypt chonology is a mess because all history is based on it and it's not just the Bibical record but other civilizations and historial alignments as well.
Even secular Egyptologists agree that Egyptian chronologies are in desperate need of revision. Manetho compiled Egyptian history into dynasties that are commonly used today, but many in the list could have ruled as a nome kingdoms which are either inflated timespans or overlapping rulers.
[Anno Mundi] CREATION DATE YEAR
Flood year 1656AM
1757 AM Peleg born (2248 BC) (for in his days was the earth divided; Genesis 10:25
Cambyses, king of Persia, conquered Egypt in 526 BC
Byzantine chronicler Constantinus Manasses (d. 1187) wrote that the Egyptian state lasted 1663 years. If correct, then counting backward from the time that Cambyses, king of Persia, conquered Egypt in 526 BC, gives us the year of 2188 BC for the founding of Egypt, about 60 years after the birth of Peleg. (Ref Ussher)
That date is 1817AM-founding of Egypt
Mizraim, the son of Ham, led his colony into Egypt.
Manetho, who recorded the history of Egypt in the third century BC. wrote that the Tower of Babel occurred five years after the birth of Peleg.
If this was so, then this would confirm that the migrations recorded in Genesis 10 occurred over a period of time.
These ancient historians in different times and in different places have confirmed the amazing accuracy of the biblical genealogies and historians all point to Peleg's birth. The beginning of Egypt would have been founded 101 years after the flood of Noah.
After the Flood, conditions of longevity continued for a while, with life-spans only gradually being reduced. Noah lived 950 years (350 of them after the Flood, Gen. 9:28-29). Noah's 3 sons had a recorded total of 16 sons and, presumably, about the same number of daughters, with each family thus averaging about 10 children. From the Flood to the birth of Abraham a total of 292 years and 8 generations are recorded.
Since there are 70 nations mentioned in Genesis 10 as resulting from the "division" at Babel, it is reasonable to infer that there were 70 family groups living during the time of Babel, representing probably the generation of Noah's grandsons and great-grandsons. Seventy families containing 800 or 1,000 individuals altogether seem to fit the situation described at Babel, leaving us with 56,000 to 70,000 indivduals, but even then we cannot assume that of all these people all just hung out in one general location, they could have migrated out to build near the general area into Nineveh and even Canaan and possibly as far as Egypt.
People had to grow crops to survive and raise livestock, that takes property so people weren't just all hanging out in cities, they had to migrate.
11 Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah,(south of Mosul in northern Iraq.)
Rehoboth is only 20 miles from Beersheba, so they were already 450 miles from Babylon into present day Israel, not a streach to imagine they were also in Egypt before the tower of Babel even occurred.
The problem here is the monstrocity of Bruegel's architecture and renditions of the tower of Babel. That painted structure would have taken millions of people and a massive labor force and its just unrealistic.
Not sure how people waiting until they were 100 years older to have children (LXX) helps Nathan's hypothisis when it doesn't describe the tower dimensions in the Bible-that's 100 years of less people early in the Biblical account, it doesn't make sense that it helps his argument at all.
Normally I wouldn't bother with commenting more but since you're adding info to dispute Nathan then I'll add more.
Nathan makes an error in the genealogy, by assumptions.
Arphaxad was born two years after the flood. This doesn't mean Arphaxad is the first to be born to Noah's sons.
Arphaxad is listed because he is the first son after the flood that God has CHOSEN in the genealogy of Shem, it is Shem's line that is listed and no one else.
What if Shem had triplets the first year after the flood and then his wife became pregnant again and had Arphaxad two years after the flood?
The point here is we cannot make assumptions based on information not given.
Ham and Japheth lines are not being followed except later in a general listing of sons, and no daughters are listed from any of the genealogies so Arphaxad isn't necessarily the "first one born" after the flood, he's the "first" son of Shem and one God has chosen.
I know this won't be a popular argument (with women) but it would seem from the passages of scripture that God caused more females to be born early in history after the flood than males. The ratio I gave earlier was a general ratio of equal amounts of males and females but there is enough evidence to show that more females were being born.
Jacob's daughter Dinah was only mentioned in scripture due to being raped. Assumptions are made that Dinah was his only daughter.
But Gen 34:8 answers that question.
And Hamor communed with them (Jacob), saying, The soul of my son Shechem longeth for your daughter: I pray you give her him to wife. 9And make ye marriages with us, and give your daughters unto us, and take our daughters unto you.
So, Dinah was not Jacob's only daughter.
The birth of females was not recorded in the scriptures, but we can observe through the lives of the Patriarchs that there seemed to be more women around than men to marry. Men in this instance were a foundation for the future for women and the stability of the family structure, marriage guaranteed women would be provided for, but there is far more to it than that. Families that had daughters could secure a position for the family unit by offering their daughters in marriage, they gained some financial security with the bride price which would be paid to the father. Given this fact, then why is there so many women that are given as handmaids, when financial security could be extended if they actually married?
It is apparent that there were more women around because handmaids were given and acquired along with concubines.
The fact that there were even handmaids as servants for married women would imply that there were far more women than men to go around, and it would make sense for this to occur if God wanted to grow the population.
Rather than 1 birth a year, a man could be the father of many children in a year's time, through wives, concubines, and handmaids. That's not a popular thought these days, but was the reality in the ancient world. Just like slavery was a reality because the limits of transportation required it, but that's another subject.
God called Abraham when he was 75 and living in Haran and God told him to leave, so Abraham left with his family and all that he acquired and at this point we do not know if Hagar was with them, but she was Egyptian.
Abraham travels to Canaan and there is a famine so he travels into Egypt and at this point the Pharaoh takes Sarah.
The concern that Abraham had about traveling into Egypt shows that it was well established. It is likely servants along with Hagar were given to Abraham at this time including livestock, which was gifts for Sarah's "brother" from the Pharaoh.
Abraham and Sarah visited Egypt, 27 years after the death of Peleg and the visit to Egypt could have been the same year Abraham left Haran. Ussher claims it was a year after Abraham left Haran (not sure why)
The fact that Abraham was fearful of going into Egypt, afraid he'd be killed for Sarah is convincing evidence that it was a formidable place.
Eight years after this visit to Egypt Abraham is going to war against Chedorlaomer a formidable king who had taken Lot his nephew.
Chedorlaomer, with Amraphel of Shinar, Arioch of Ellasar and Tidal king of the nations, combined their forces and carried away Lot as a prisoner with all the plunder of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Chedorlaomer had formed an alliance with a group of other kings (Genesis 14:1–3)
It seems like a total 180-degree turn for Abraham, from being fearful of entering Egypt and then a short time later going to war against Chedorlaomer and the kings united with him. It makes no sense unless Egypt from Abraham's perspective was more formidable than going to war with Chedorlaomer, and those united with him, which implies a lot.
Egypt was 266 years old when Abraham visited, if he went when he was 75 which would seem logical because it only takes a few months to get to Canaan from Haran, and that is if you're taking your time.
It seems feasible that when Abraham was in Egypt, Hagar was given to him at this time.
The Pharaoh paid a bride price for Sarah, showing this was a practice in the ancient world and not just a practice of the Hebrews.
Men that had daughters born in the family would secure the family's position in offering their daughters as wives, this extended the family's position and secured a future for their daughters.
When Abraham's servant was sent to fetch a bride for Isaac, the servant paid a bride price for Rebekah -(and she left with her damsels)- Keep in mind here that to send Rebekah with "damsels" is putting a crunch on the family's position, unless there are more than enough women to go around.
Laban was someone that was more than willing to take advantage of a situation as we find later with Jacob, even taking advantage of his own family members since Laban was Jacob's uncle (the brother of Rebekah)
Why are handmaids even given to Rebekah and then Leah and Rachel as servants for them when the handmaids could be married to others that extended the family position?
Jacob had Leah and Rachel as wives but along with them, Jacob was also the father of their handmaid's offspring, Bilhah and Zilpah
When nailing down the early population, we have to inspect all of the details in the scriptures that are given, along with the longevity of the population.
The scriptures indicate far more women to go around than males born and this fact would cause the population to explode.
Obviously, God prefers one man for one woman, but in the early days after the flood to increase the population it could be argued that more females were born, and close intermarrying siblings weren't an issue.
As long as people were cared for within this family structure God permitted this.
Abraham himself was born in this very situation, showing how early in the Biblical record he lived, his father Terah was with Abraham's mother and Sarah's mother making Sarah his half-sister which is realistic being born 292 years after the flood.
The Old Testament is filled with men with wives and concubines.
If the population born were nearly equal, then this fact would not be so.
The OT addresses the population issue very well in indirect ways.
You need to really contemplate these issues because if the chain of custody doesn't go from Shem to Abraham we have a real problem.
The promise could then be argued that the promises were usurped or broken and didn't go through a succession of people chosen by God to each individual through this order of descent.-that was passed by an oath.
It starts with Shem, skipping over him is a problem and breaks the chain of promises passed to him.
It could then be argued that the Hebrews "could have" borrowed from others, and it's a valid argument, but it's not a valid one if Shem was alive to witness the birth of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and he passed the blessing and promises to Abraham.
I have to admit, this would be the first time I have seen a total breakdown of this chain of events- I can understand the genealogy through the ages
and I can understand the Priesthood through Shem
But if he is dead, the whole thing unravels.
And I have never seen that happen once in the scriptures.
another point for you to contemplate is the list above on trying to figure out who the person could possible be- The scriptures addresses it in what God was doing, if we pay attention to what God was habitually doing then it is not that hard to know who the man is- that is the king of Salem.
-It CANNOT be Jesus. In Hebrews it is Christ, but a forerunner held the office in the OT.- Because through the OT God used people as types Abraham, Isaac & Jacob
Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
I didn't just make that up. If it were "made up" then the type would not follow anything that makes a lick of sense. But it does make sense and leads to information that is astounding and fulfilled in the New Testament.
God used Joseph as a type in shocking detail- for what the Messiah would endure, and then rose from the pit that saved both Jew and Gentile.
God used forerunners to hold these positions. EVERY TIME!
God used King David as a forerunner in the idea that one day the King of Kings would hold that position.
Throughout the OT God used MEN to shadow himself.
Jesus didn't just step into these positions because he is God. God mirrored all of the titles and positions using men down through the ages- and then he earned these positions- by defeating the devil and laying down his life.
Once you begin to see the types God was constantly using in the OT the Hebrews7 question gets addressed, because it certainly cannot be Jesus in the OT hanging out getting spoils of war and then blessing Abraham with the Kings of Sodom & Gommorah present.
The lack of passing a blessing on to the next generation that God had chosen is a serious blunder since we see it occur over and over again in each succeeding generation.
Since the promise was given to Shem, Shem needs to pass that to Abraham and by failing to recognize this and given all the factual information isn't "circular reasoning"
LXX makes a huge blunder stating Mathusalah died a few years after the flood and we're supposed to ignore that error because it has Shem dying early so there is no possibility this is Shem- Okay, so who is this man? It's a fair question because it most definitely is a man.
The problem is we can follow the oath and it doesn't lead to Levi and when it's all said and done what happens actually addresses a mystery that most people don't even understand, because God uses these types and if you don't have a grip on them then things said in the Old Testament do not make sense.
Shem- who is a type of ancient of days- came from a pre-flood world.
To Abraham- Type of the Father, offering up his Son
To Isaac.- Type of the Son offered as a sacrifice
To Jacob. Type of the Holy Spirit with two brides- Leah & Rachel-Jews and Gentiles
To Joseph, - a double portion - Type of the Messiah
Jacob blesses the Sons of Joseph- Manasseh and Ephraim
Ephraim being younger receives the greater blessing.
In the scripture, God says "and Ephraim is my firstborn"
That comment makes no sense, because Ephraim wasn't Joseph's "firstborn"
It's not understandable until you allow the types God is using to represent the person he is shadowing.
Joseph was a type of the Messiah in amazing detail - His younger son Ephraim is HIS firstborn- Being born again. It's all so beautiful.
Genesis is painting a portrait through the lives of men and the face he paints throughout is the face of Jesus Christ.
But with the chain broken in the LXX- all of this unravels.
The accusation of the MT being written by a bunch of Jews trying to hide that Jesus is the Messiah is hogwash.-They certainly did a poor job of it, if that were even remotely true.
That accusation shows a complete ignorance of the OT.
The Genesis account shows the logical relation between sets.
It's pretty mindblowing because the details illustrate simple set relationships in the Venn diagram of probability, logic, statistics, linguistics and computer science.
The Genesis account is drawing a Venn diagram- it's very hard for me to even describe it, let alone totally comprehend it.
I guess I have "circular reasoning" because I see circles in my head which is the Venn diagram of logic & linguistics, here is one set of circles that swirl through my head.