Posted by UPDATE!UPDATE! [Bibleman] on November 27, 1999 at 09:23:49 {nwG7wj0NI.f9UnUPxURUslyACFuF8c}:
In Reply to: BIBLEMAN WHADDA YA THINK? posted by na on November 26, 1999 at 11:51:08:
Hi Da,
Thanks to you, I have looked at this more closely and now I have a REVISION in my previous ideas about the 14 generations. Not too complex. Since Matthew dates one generation from David to the deportation and not specifically to a person, we have grounds to establish that these "generations" are TIME BLOCKS and not related specifically to the genealogies.
So the reference to "fourteen generations" implies each time block must be divisible by 14, with several of the specific EVENTS being the birth of a certain person, but at least one EVENT not related to the birth of a specific individual and that is the date of the first deportation.
As noted from my chart, the critical dates are all divisible by 14 and so while you might be able to explain 14 generations by inserting a name not included in the list, this is not what is implied specifically by this chronology. Of note, during the specific dating of the "deportation" a generation is skipped, that of Jehoiakim. So there was a focus on having the chronology all divisible by 14 which we now understand establishes yet another subtle Biblical chronology pattern, which repeats in the modern age, specifically the period from birth of Abraham to death of Jesus' generation at 70 to be 4x490 or 1960 years. This is a number that occurs elsewhere. But based upon the correct chronology, this limits that period to 1960 years which disproves once again the expanded chronology of the WTS or popular secular history is inaccurate and incompatible with Biblical chronology, both overt and hidden.
I wanted to retract at this time, therefore, my suggestion of a quick-fix by adding in an extra generation since this is number-specific to EVENTS, 3 of which just happen to be births, but one being related to a specific individual. So the context, even though dealing with genealogy, really is giving us a pattern of chronology that now seems to have worked itself out quite apparently. See below chart.
So thanks! This was a great discovery thanks to you!
Cheers,
Bibleman
