Princeton to Middleton

"Middleton's" (actually someone else's) Reasons Against Genesis 5 and 11 Genealogies · Biblical Genealogies, J. Richard Middleton · Princeton to Middleton · Middleton's Blogs Continue

A certain look at Princeton from radiologist points of view is, it has a high background radiation. And cultural history gives this a similar slant:

Back in the nineteenth century, the conservative Princeton professor William Henry Green compared different biblical genealogies that cover the same time period and noted that they did not match up (various generations were skipped), so they were not meant to be exhaustive. His initial comparisons were between Chronicles, Ezra, and Matthew; but he went on to conclude that it would be a mistake to use the genealogies in the primeval history (Genesis 1-11) to calculate the age of the earth or the human race.1 This argument convinced B. B. Warfield, Green’s colleague at Princeton. Although Warfield was instrumental in formulating the modern doctrine of inerrancy, he fully accepted the great antiquity of the earth that geological studies were beginning to show.2

Now, it may help to compare Catholics in this time. This was before a Paris Jesuit proposed and got vetted by the Paris archbishop in a larger reference work published in 1920 the theory now known as "framework theory" - in his terms : "the six days are a freely chosen literary form, that does not fall under inspiration or therefore inerrancy" (we have our doctrine of inerrancy, not formulated in Princeton).

While writing this he gave the previous theories current in the Catholic world. All three of them fall within the spectrum that would classify as "Fundamentalist":

• literal six days, literally at beginning of the universe (young earth creationism);
• literal six days, but in rebuilding the universe after earth had become tohu ve bohu (gap theory);
• six days = six longer periods of time (day age theory).

The actual reason he rejects the first school is, he thinks it is scientifically out of play, geology has disproven it, notably, geologic periods could not be from the Flood, as the mountains are too high for the Flood to cover them all, and, as Pyrenees was "obviously" far older than Alps, this especially seen from high and "older" mountains like the Pyrenees.

And the reason he rejects the other two is, they don't get any support at all from geology taken at "long age" supposed "face value" either.

He also claims that the YEC position is abandoned since last book published on that theoretical ground was from 1896 or 1894.

So, he had not heard the YEC position on mountains stating that:

• very high mountains rose after the Flood
• "old" looking mountains also rose after the Flood - at least if very high.

Let's be clear, if the geology doesn't really rule out a recent creation (like timeline Adam to Jesus in either Masoretic / Vulgate / Usher or LXX / Roman martyrology terms), the extrapolation from omissions in Matthew to hypothetical omissions in Genesis 5 or 11 or both, is weak. The omissions have a purpose, and it probably is a boon to St. Matthew that by omitting three or four evil generations (the three after Athalia, possibly one more) he got the 14 between Solomon and Babylonian captivity he wanted. He would not have culled away more than ritually "cullable" just to get 14.

Now, obviously, a conclusion reached between Protestants in Princeton is very far from binding on Catholics. Or, in thise case, loosing. Princeton was not given the presence of Peter and successors to whom Christ gave the keys to bind and loose.

Now, I would give another view of the genealogies in Genesis 4 and 5. Genesis 4 narrative started out as narrative and had Cain's genealogy inserted. Genesis 5 branched off the genealogy of Seth and Enosh, which would have been too unwieldy to also have on the same text. Hence, first version of the text, back in Adam's time:

And Adam knew Eve his wife: who conceived and brought forth Cain, saying: I have gotten a man through God. [2] And again she brought forth his brother Abel. And Abel was a shepherd, and Cain a husbandman. [3] And it came to pass after many days, that Cain offered, of the fruits of the earth, gifts to the Lord. [4] Abel also offered of the firstlings of his flock, and of their fat: and the Lord had respect to Abel, and to his offerings. [5] But to Cain and his offerings he had no respect: and Cain was exceedingly angry, and his countenance fell. [6] And the Lord said to him: Why art thou angry? and why is thy countenance fallen? [7] If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? but if ill, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it. [8] And Cain said to Abel his brother: Let us go forth abroad. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and slew him. [9] And the Lord said to Cain: Where is thy brother Abel? And he answered, I know not: am I my brother's keeper? [10] And he said to him: What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth to me from the earth. [11] Now, therefore, cursed shalt thou be upon the earth, which hath opened her mouth and received the blood of thy brother at thy hand. [12] When thou shalt till it, it shall not yield to thee its fruit: a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be upon the earth. [13] And Cain said to the Lord: My iniquity is greater than that I may deserve pardon. [14] Behold thou dost cast me out this day from the face of the earth, and I shall be hidden from thy face, and I shall be a vagabond and a fugitive on the earth: every one, therefore, that findeth me, shall kill me. [15] And the Lord said to him: No, it shall not be so: but whosoever shall kill Cain, shall be punished sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, that whosoever found him should not kill him. [16] And Cain went out from the face of the Lord, and dwelt as a fugitive on the earth, at the east side of Eden. ... [25] Adam ... knew his wife again: and she brought forth a son, and called his name Seth, saying: God hath given me another seed, for Abel whom Cain slew.

Second version adds verse 17 and therefore also an "also" in verse 25. And as generations were added, more and more was added on the Cainite side, while the updating on Sethite side ends with [26] But to Seth also was born a son, whom he called Enos; this man began to call upon the name of the Lord. Instead of continuing, one started a new text to transmit orally:

[1] This is the book of the generation of Adam. In the day that God created man, he made him to the likeness of God. [2] He created them male and female; and blessed them: and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. [3] And Adam lived a hundred [two hundred] and thirty years, and begot a son to his own image and likeness, and called his name Seth. ... [6] Seth also lived a [two] hundred and five years, and begot Enos.

And insertions as people die and are born. Obviously, more people than just the one son leading up to Noah were born in each generation, and each branch kept its version of it, but the one surviving is the one leading up to Noah - because he survived the Flood. Genealogies of patrilinear descent growing with the generations actually is a fact studied by anthropology.

All the purposes of symbolism, for instance Adam and Enosh both mean human (earthling and mortal) are certainly there, were certainly considered by Moses, but equally, were not his purpose for articulating a totally new text, but were used by him when inserting old passage after old passage of older texts.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Sts Simon and Jude, Apostles
28.X.2021

In Perside natalis beatorum Apostolorum Simonis Chananaei, et Thaddaei, qui et Judas dicitur. Ex ipsis autem Simon in Aegypto, Thaddaeus in Mesopotamia Evangelium praedicavit; deinde, in Persidem simul ingressi, ibi, cum innumeram gentis illius multitudinem Christo subdidissent, martyrium consummarunt.

I cited : BioLogos : The Genealogies in Genesis: Part I
By J. Richard Middleton On July 28, 2021
https://biologos.org/series/how-should-we-interpret-biblical-genealogies/articles/the-genealogies-in-genesis-part-i