[b-hebrew] Assumptions about ANE ages that just don't work

biblical hebrew jcr.bhebrew at gmail.com
Mon Oct 22 05:55:38 EDT 2007

I think you could easily make a few million on an Indiana Jones film or with
a best selling Da Vinci Code style novel with this theory but you will find
it a little more difficult to persuade the academics of the validity of such
a theory on this list

However, what is of particular note, is your ability to completely self
contradict yourself. In one thread you arguing for Sarah's old age in order
to advance a conspiract theory. And in another you are proving that she
wasn't that old in order to advance another conspiracy theory. Are you going
to choose which conspiracy theory you prefer and make a solid stand on that

James Christian Read - BSc Computer Science
http://www.lamie.org/hebrew       Thesis 1 - Aleppo codex machine
http://www.lamie.org/lad-sim.doc  Thesis 2 - language acquisition simulation

On 10/21/07, JimStinehart at aol.com <JimStinehart at aol.com> wrote:
> Yaakov (J) Stein:
> You need to do the math right, and then you will see that  all the numbers
> make perfect sense.
> You wrote:  "Terah could die at the old age of 205/2 = 102,
> and Abraham at 75/2 =  35 took off from Haran."
> But if you do the math right, everything becomes  clear.
> 75/2 = 37½
> Now we're ready to see the peculiar number 17½ writ large  in the
> Patriarchal
> narratives, and thereby figure out the historical time period  of the
> Patriarchal Age.
>    1.  We know that each of Isaac and Esau marries at age 20  regular
> years
> (stated age 40 "years", in 6-month "years").  By analogy, Abraham probably
> married  at age 20.  That means that when  Abraham and Sarah take off from
> Harran, Sarah has been barren for 17½ regular  years.
>    1.  Abraham dies at state age 175 "years".  That's age 17½, tenfold.
> Are you starting to catch it?  The one and only fraction in
> the  Patriarchal
> narratives is 1/10, as the Hebrew word for tithe means 1/10.  Abraham
> tithes a
> tenth to Melchizedek,  and in the Jacob's Ladder scene, Jacob promises to
> tithe
> a  tenth.
>    1.  Abraham's actual age at death is 87½ regular  years.  His father
> sired him at  age 70 "years", Jacob leads 70 Hebrews into Egypt, and the
> Egyptians mourn  Jacob's death for 70 days.  So 87½  suggests 87½ - 70 =
> 17½..
>    1.  You are right that Terakh dies at age 102½.  Now do the
> math.  Isaac
> is born when Abraham is age 50  regular years.  17½ years later,  Terakh
> dies.
> Terakh was age 35  when he sired Abraham.  Terakh  dies 67½ regular years
> later, at age 102½.  Abraham is age 67½ at Terakh's death,  meaning that
> Terakh
> died 17½ regular years after the Covenant was fulfilled  with Isaac's
> birth.
> (By the way,  Terakh's death is what causes Abraham to find out about the
> existence of  Rebekah.  2½ regular years later,  when Abraham is age 70
> regular
> years, Isaac and Rebekah  wed.)
>    1.  If you get serious about counting years, you can figure  out that
> Judah is born 117½ years after Abraham's birth.  (Abraham had already died
> 30
> years  earlier, at age 87½.)
>    1.  Joseph is born 2½ regular years after Judah, in Year  120.  (120
> regular years after  Abraham's birth.)  Joseph dies at  stated age 110
> "years",
> which is age 55 regular years.  So the Patriarchal narratives end
> with  Joseph'
> s death, 55 years after Year 120, which is Year 175.  I'm sure you see by
> now:
> Year 175 is 17½, tenfold.  Everything is based on the peculiar  number
> 17½.
>    1.  No other composition in mankind's 5,000-year history  has focused
> on
> the peculiar number 17½.   Only the Patriarchal narratives.   The author
> is
> trying to tell us something.  The author is telling us the
> exact  historical
> time period of the Patriarchal narratives.  We need to look for a famous
> king who
> died more than ½-way through his 17th regnal year.  That could be
> represented in the  ancient world (which did not have a zero) by the
> number 17½.   That'
> s the king whose reign  coincides with the historical Patriarchal Age, in
> my
> controversial  view.
> The text as is is perfect.  We just need to understand what the text  is
> telling us.
> Jim Stinehart
> Evanston,  Illinois
> ************************************** See what's new at
> http://www.aol.com
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list