Are the Genealogies of Genesis Open or Closed?

Introduction:
The problem of deciphering the genealogies in Genesis is one that has been plaguing Christians for hundreds of years. The major issue concerning the text is whether we can use the chronologies to date certain events in the Old Testament. Many people are curious about the dates for important events such as creation and Noah's flood. Christians want to better understand their Bible and therefore better understand the timeline of events mentioned in Scripture. The unlocking of such dates depends on the question at hand. It should first be explained what open and closed genealogies are. A closed genealogy is one that has no gaps in it whatsoever. A closed genealogy would not leave out anyone in a certain line of descent. Open genealogies however have gaps, usually because the person compiling the genealogy decided some names were unimportant or there were just too many people to document. If a genealogy is open, it still can give an accurate line of descent but it is not as thorough as a closed genealogy.

Moses wrote the Genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 but they were probably compiled by multiple people through oral sources and written sources throughout history before him. The problem with these genealogies is that the some of the people in them (especially Genesis 5) lived in the pre-historic era, which is before 3,000 B.C. (Davis 28) therefore we have no writings concerning them written during their time period. It should be noted that Genesis 5 is meant to show the line of descent from Adam to Noah and Genesis 11:10-26 is compiled to show the line of descent from Shem, the son of Noah, to Abraham the father of Israel. Both of these genealogies tie in with New Testament genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3:21-38, both of which are obviously open genealogies because they both have huge generational gaps. No one is concerned though with these two genealogies because no one expected them to be closed genealogies. They are genealogies of the royal dynasty of Jesus, who is the King of Israel and the King of Kings. Matthew starts with Abraham to show Jesus is in the line of David and the rightful ruler of Israel. Luke works his way backwards from Joseph the father of Jesus all the way back to Adam. He hopes to show that Jesus is the Last Adam who has come to redeem the human race. 1 Corinthians 15:45 also states this point when Paul says So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. Paul is referencing Genesis 2:7.

No scholars would debate that the New Testament genealogies are open, however when it comes to Genesis some are adamant to show that Genesis 5 and 11 are closed genealogies. Part of this concern over Genesis has to do with the evolutionary model and the massive geological ages that have been pushed on science and society. Some Christians feel safer with closed genealogies and a definite date of creation so they can have an idea of a recent creation. This concern while honest is unfounded because even if the genealogies in Genesis were open there would have to be 2,500 missing generations to get even 100,000 years of history. (Ham, Pierce) Whether the genealogies are open are closed, creation is still very recent. Therefore it is important that we leave any pre-suppositions we have aside and use only the Biblical context, grammar, and the ancient near eastern customs in writing genealogies for data.

I. The Genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 are closed.

A. Arguments for the view
1. The age of the father is given at the birth of the next name in line; therefore there is no room for gaps. (Sarfati)

2. The Masoretic text gives a believable chronology with no gaps if no other source is considered. (Williams)

3. Methuselah's name in Hebrew can mean, when he dies it shall be sent which is fitting since he died in the year of Noah's flood, assuming the genealogies of Genesis are closed and that the Masoretic text is the correct source for dating the flood.

B. Arguments Against the view
1. All ancient texts pertaining to the genealogies should be considered; only trusting the Masoretic text is a narrow-minded view.

2. The dates given to certain events in scripture in light of this view does not match up with archeological findings such as the dating of Jericho which dates back to 8,000 B.C.

3. Methuselahcan also be interpreted to mean "man of the spear"; therefore we shouldn't read our observations and interpretations of the dating of Noah's flood into a separate issue of the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11.

4. Most other Old Testament Genealogies are known to be open so Genesis 5 and 11 should not need to be any different.

5. There is little reason or need to give a complete listing of names since it is ancestry, not the actual number of generations that is important. (Milliam)

C. Proponents of the view
Ken Ham
Jonathan Sarfati
Larry Pierce
Pete Williams

II. The Genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 are open.

A. Arguments for the view
1. The Sumerian King List (an open genealogy), although not totally trustworthy, has dynasty lines that have been proven to exist; therefore it is possible for Genesis to have been written in the same way.

2. The main purpose of the genealogies to is to show kingship therefore Moses would not care about gaps since his purpose was not totally historical; it was theological because they tie in with the genealogy of Jesus.

3. The Hebrew word "yalad" which means "begat" can refer to fathering a line instead of child.

4. Archeology of Biblical events and places demand creation to be pushed further back to 10,000-15,000 years ago; therefore there must be gaps in the genealogies.

5. The word for "father" in Hebrew ('ab) can also mean grandfather or ancestor.

6. Modern genealogies are generally intended to be complete, most Biblical genealogies are telescoped. (Millam)

B. Arguments against the view

1. Just because the Hebrew word for father can mean ancestor in the Old Testament it doesnt necessarily mean the same thing in Genesis 5 and 11.

2. There are seven known places in Genesis 5 and 11 were gaps are impossible such as Adam to Seth and Seth to Enosh. (Sarfati)

C. Proponents of the view

John Millam
Hugh Ross

Conclusion:
This question has been very hard for me to come to conclusion on. Good Christians are on both sides of the fence and both seem to have enough evidence to hold their conclusions with some certainty. When it comes down to it though I have to lean towards the genealogies being open. It makes more sense to me considering the writing styles of the times and what the purposes of the genealogies are. The important part of Genesis 5 and 11 is the ancestry represented and not a method to chronologically plot out events. The ancient reader would not read the Genesis genealogies and try to determine when creation was or when the flood happened. Instead they would use them for what they are intended. The ancient Hebrews rarely wanted to know exactly when dates were for certain things. They sometimes used the Exodus as a marker for battles and events after it. Other than that they had no focus on exact dating. We live in a scientific age and we are bent on figuring out every mystery in life and in the Bible. We may never know the exact date of creation, that should not take away from our awe of God for what he has created. This is not an issue that should divide Christians; in light of other things this is actually a rather small question. No one has ever been burned at the stake or kicked out of leadership for believing the genealogies are open or closed. Therefore we should be open to new evidence on the issue and constantly be rethinking what we know of ancient near eastern culture and how the Bible was written.

Bibliography

Ham, Ken, and Larry Pierce. "Who Begat Whom?" Answers 5 Sept. 2006. 1 Oct. 2006 .
Millam, John. "The Genesis Genealogies." (2004). 1 Oct. 2006 .
Sarfati, Jonathan. "Biblical Chronogenealogies." TJ os 17 (2003): 14-18. 31 Sept. 2006 .
Williams, Pete. "Some Remarks Preliminary to a Biblical Chronology." TJ os 12 (1998): 98-106. 1 Oct. 2006 .