Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Genesis 11:10 ¶ These are the records of the generations of Shem. Shem was one hundred years old, and became the father of Arpachshad two years after the flood; |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Genesis 11:10 ¶ These are the records of the generations of Shem [from whom Abraham descended]. Shem was a hundred years old when he became the father of Arpachshad, two years after the flood. |
Subject: Did Shem exit the Ark at 98, outlv Abrm? |
Bible Note: Hello EdB, "The main thing that bothers me about the Cainan being added in Luke is that Luke himself apparently did in fact included it. Most give the reason for this as Luke copied the genealogy from an altered copy of the Septuagint. That is interesting but one would think that God being God and able to create the universe would have been able to insure his chosen writer, that was recording events for all of mankind, would have a faithful copy from which to take that Genealogy." The article at http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3748.asp was written by Dr Jonathan D. Sarfati, B.Sc. (Hons.), Ph.D., F.M. ( He has written many apologetics books. I am impressed by his biography at: http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/j_sarfati.asp) and goes to great lengths to show that the second Cainan was not in the oldest copy of the Septuagint or the oldest copy of Luke. As support to it not being in older copies of the Septuagint, they quote a study by Mr. Larry Pierce. Mr Pierce, in turn, studies secular ancient writings of Josephus (AD 37/38 – c.100) to show that the extra Cainan was not in Josephus’ copy of the Septuagint. Even though Josephus’ copy contained most of the same errors (100 years added to each person in the genealogy), the extra Cainan was still not there. "Another thing that bothers me very much about the inadvertent addition of Cainan into the Septuagint theory is the fact the Septuagint was in existence at the time of Jesus and in fact some scholars feel certain that Jesus quoted from it. In any case the importance of that work had to be known to Jesus at the time. If Cainan was in fact added into any copy as some claim the name was I would think Jesus would have said, "hey you guys messed up." I know many claim the addition of Cainan didn’t happen until later when Luke was writing his account. But that doesn’t hold up against the theory the name was added to BC manuscripts and Septuagint manuscripts to add length to the Jewish culture to match Egyptian culture." Mr. Pierce summarizes: "I think we have more than enough evidence that would stand up in any court of law to show that every single copy we have of the LXX text was corrupted some time after AD 220. The copies of the LXX available to both Josephus and Africanus did not include this spurious generation. It is also not in either the Samaritan Pentateuch or the Hebrew manuscripts… …All these predate the New Testament Greek text. …" EdB, when you say "…that doesn’t hold up against the theory the name was added to BC manuscripts and Septuagint manuscripts…", do you count the Samaritan Pentateuch or the Hebrew manuscripts? Happy New Year, Pastor Glenn |