Peer Reviewed Articles
“I Kings 6:1 and the Date of the Exodus from the Masoretic and Septuagint Textual Traditions,” Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin 69 (2024): 41–64.
1 Kings 6:1 is a crucial biblical text lying at the heart of the debate over the date of the Exodus. Fifteenth century BC Exodus proponents have predominantly adopted the reading from the Masoretic Text (MT), “in the 480th year.” The majority of Greek Septuagint manuscripts contain “in the 440th year,” while several others match the MT. This forty-year difference obviously impacts how relevant Levantine and Egyptian archaeological and historical evidence correlates with the biblical text. In this article, I survey evidence for the preservation of these two ordinal numbers. This includes (1) Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, (2) translations derived from both textual traditions, and (3) external witnesses which document the readings. The highly complex translational and transmissional history of the Greek text of 1 Kings is sketched out, and how those complexities might impact text critical decision making. The concluding section surveys archaeological and historical evidence from the late divided kingdom era directly related to the number and how that evidence aids in adjudicating this chronologically precise textual variant.
Henry B. Smith Jr. and Kris J. Udd, “On the Authenticity of Kainan, Son of Arpachshad,” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 24 (2019): 119–54.
Kainan, the son of Arpachshad in Luke 3:36, is considered original to Luke’s messianic genealogy by the editors of Novum Testamentum Graece 28 (NA28) and UBS 5. A few scholars have argued instead that his name originated as a scribal error in an early manuscript of Luke’s Gospel. Then, Christian scribes across the Mediterranean world almost universally accepted his name as original to Luke, interpolating
Kainam/n into the forty plus manuscripts of Luke presently extant.
According to this theory, Christian scribes also added Kainan to all
known Septuagint (LXX) manuscripts of Genesis 11:13b–14b dated
prior to the 12th century AD. While doing so, they allegedly borrowed
the begetting age (130) and remaining years of life (330) from Shelah
in the next verse (LXX Gen 11:15–16) and falsely assigned them to
Kainan. They also added Kainan to some manuscripts of LXX Genesis
10:24 and 1 Chronicles 1:18, 24. Additionally, Christian scribes also amended extant copies of the pseudepigraphical Book of Jubilees by fabricating a biography for Kainan in chapter eight and inserting it be-
tween the lives of Arpachshad and Shelah. This article will examine several lines of textual and historical evidence and demonstrate that this explanation for Kainan’s origin cannot be sustained. Other untenable theories of Kainan’s origin will also be explored. Instead of being spurious, Kainan’s originality in LXX Genesis 10:24 and 11:13b–14b, the Book of Jubilees, and Luke 3:36 is virtually certain. Moreover, we will also propose that the most viable explanation for the known matrix of evidence is that Kainan appeared in the original Hebrew text of Genesis, but first disappeared from Genesis 11 by a combination of scribal and mental error in a very ancient archetypal Hebrew manuscript. This was followed by a complex sequence of events that occurred over the span of several centuries.
“The Case for the Septuagint’s Chronology in Genesis 5 and 11,” in Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism, ed. John H. Whitmore (International Conference on Creationism, Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship, 2018), 117–32.
Many biblical scholars who interpret the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 as yielding a continuous chronology from Adam to Abraham claim the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) preserves the original begetting ages for the patriarchs. The MT’s total for this period is 2008 years. The Samaritan Pentateuch (SP) presents markedly different chronological
data for each epoch, for a grand total of 2249 years. Calculations derived from the primary manuscripts (MSS) of the Greek Septuagint (LXX) yield a chronology of 3394 years for this period, 1386 years greater than the MT. The MT is classically represented by the Ussher chronology, which places creation at 4004 BC and the Flood at 2348 BC. Figures from the LXX place creation at ca. 5554 BC and the Flood at ca. 3298 BC. This paper proposes that the LXX preserves (most of) the original numbers in Genesis 5 and 11. Most of the MT’s chronology in Genesis 5 and 11 does not represent the original text, and is the result of a deliberate and systematic post AD 70 corruption. Corroborating external witnesses, internal and external evidence, text critical and LXX studies, and historical testimonies will be presented, along with arguments rebutting LXX inflation hypotheses. Explanations for important, accidental scribal errors will be discussed, and a text critical reconstruction of Genesis 5 and 11 will be proposed.
“Methuselah’s Begetting Age in Genesis 5:25 and the Primeval Chronology of the Septuagint: A Closer Look at the Textual and Historical Evidence,” Answers Research Journal 10 (August 2017): 169–79.
Most young-earth creationists who view the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 as yielding a continuous chronology from the creation of Adam to the birth of Abraham claim that the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) preserves the original begetting ages given to Moses by Yahweh. Calculations derived from the MT yield a timespan for this period of about 2008 years. The Greek Septuagint (LXX) yields a chronology for this era of 3394 years, 1386 years greater than the MT. In some LXX manuscripts of Genesis 5:25, Methuselah was 167 years old when he fathered Lamech, placing Methuselah’s death 14 years beyond the Deluge. This obvious problem often leads to a swift dismissal of any possibility that the LXX might preserve the original begetting ages and remaining years of life for each named patriarch in Genesis 5 and 11. This article will examine this issue and advance four main points: (1) the figure of 187 for Methuselah is original to the LXX translation and to Moses; (2) the reading of 167 in certain manuscripts of the LXX is a scribal error which occurred early in its complex transmissional history; (3) the appearance of 167 in some LXX manuscripts does not automatically negate the overall validity of the LXX’s primeval chronology; and (4) numerous lines of historical and textual evidence suggest the young-earth creation community should remain open and willing to contemplate the strong likelihood that the primeval chronology of the LXX reflects most of the numbers that Moses originally recorded in Genesis 5 and 11.
“Cosmic and Universal Death From Adam’s Fall: An Exegesis of Romans 8:19–23a,” Journal of Creation 21, no. 1 (2007): 75–85.
Paul’s theological treatise in the epistle to the Romans clearly teaches that the animal kingdom and the entire universe experienced a universal death sentence at the time of Adam’s fall in Genesis 3. This provides solid support for a young-earth understanding of the Creation/Fall narratives found in the early chapters of Genesis. First, a detailed exegesis of Romans 8:19–23a1 demonstrates this. The Greek word for creation, κτίσις (ktisis), in this context refers to the entire sub-human created order. Second, ‘the one who subjected it in hope’ in verse
20 is God. Lastly, there is a direct connection between this passage and the universal death sentence caused by the fall of Adam in Genesis 3:14–19.
“Canaanite Child Sacrifice, Abortion, and the Bible,” Journal of Ministry and Theology, Fall 2013, 90–125.
Additional Articles on Genesis and Biblical Chronology
“Wild West Evangelical Hermeneutics (Part Three): The Patriarchal Lifespans.” Bible and Spade 35, no. 3/4 (Summer/Fall 2022): 42–52.
“Wild West Evangelical Hermeneutics (Part Two): Jesus Christ and the Supreme Authority of Scripture.” Bible and Spade 34, no. 4 (Fall 2021): 25–32.
“Wild West Evangelical Hermeneutics (Part One): The Failure of Comparative Archaeological Method.” Bible and Spade 34, no. 3 (Summer 2021): 22–28.
“From Adam to Abraham: The Latest on the Genesis 5 and 11 Project.” Associates for Biblical Research, January 14, 2021.
“By Whose Authority?” Bible and Spade 33, no. 4 (Fall 2020): 10–11.
“Setting the Record Straight on the Primeval Chronology of the Septuagint: A Response to Cosner and Carter.” Bible and Spade 31, no. 4 (Fall 2018): 114–133.
“New Evidence for Kainan in New Testament and LXX Papyri,” Bible and Spade 31, no. 3 (Summer 2018): 70–77.
“A Report on the Genesis 5 and 11 Research Project.” Associates for Biblical Research, July 27, 2018.
“MT, SP, or LXX? Deciphering a Textual and Chronological Conundrum in Genesis 5,” Bible and Spade 31, no. 1 (Winter 2018): 18–27.
“From Adam to Abraham: An Update on the Genesis 5 and 11 Research Project.” Associates for Biblical Research, April 26, 2017.
Jeremy Sexton and Henry B. Smith Jr. “Primeval Chronology Restored: Revisiting the Genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11,” Bible and Spade 29, no. 2 (Spring/Summer 2016): 42–49.
“Cosmic Death in Romans 8: Affirming a Recent Creation,” Bible and Spade 26, No. 1 (Winter 2013): 8–14.

