When The Bible's Math Doesn't Add Up

Week one into the Read the Bible 2012 campaign and I got a great question from a congregant about Bible math. No, it's not the end-times math that treats the Bible like the periodic table. 
The question is actually about an apparent conflict between Genesis 12 and Stephen's speech in Acts 7, and, secondarily, about the different translations between the NIV and ESV. 

Here's how it played out.

The question:

Question for you regarding the ESV/NIV translations on something in Genesis 11 & 12 (yep.... read  a few verses ahead...).   In the NIV 12:1 reads: "The LORD had said to Abram...." and the ESV reads:  "Now the LORD said to Abram..." (they did have a note "Or had said... so grammar allows for this reading").   I think I noticed this because I have been studying Abraham's call, life, obedience, disobedience, etc.  Everything I've learned states that Genesis 11:31-32 took place AFTER God's call to Abram probably while he was still living in Mesopotamia. 


When I looked at the ESV notes, they seemed to be presenting a different picture of this order and gave ages of Terah and Abram to resolve what Stephen stated in Acts 7:4:  "The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia before he lived in Haran, and said to him, 'Go out from your land and from your kindred and go into the land that I will show you...'".

I realize in the big picture .... Jesus, Jesus, Jesus!! ..... that this is not a huge thing, but want to handle God's Word correctly.

 Here was my reply:

Thanks for the email. I’m not sure why the translators chose “said”  instead of “had said” since they use “had said” in other places all over the  Old Testament. I don’t think, though, that they are trying to change the way  we read the timeline.

The “had said” vs. “said” is not the issue most  closely associated with the presumed conflict between Genesis and Acts. After  all, said and had said can easily be the same thing. For example, if I say,  “Jim said, ‘Let’s go the movies.’” that could mean that (hypothetically)  Jim and I are on the phone talking about where to go, and Melissa is next to  me wondering what Jim’s suggestion is. I say “Jim said...” In this case,  “said” is virtually real-time.

However, imagine that Jim, Melissa and  I made a plan on Monday to do something on Friday. On Tuesday, Jim told me  “Let’s go to the movies.” On Thursday, Melissa asks me what we’re doing with  Jim on Friday, and I say, “Jim said, ‘Let’s go to the movies.’” That isn’t  real-time. You told me something in the more distant past, that I am conveying  to Melissa in real-time. Now, I could have said, “Jim HAD said, ‘Let’s go to  the movies.’” but it’s not necessary.

I think the bigger point of  conflict between Acts 7 and Gen 11 & 12 is in 12:4 (ESV and NIV), “Abram  was seventy-five years old when he set out from Haran.”

Given that  Terah was 205 when he died (Genesis 11:32) and 70 when he “became the father of Abram, Nahor,  and Haran” (Genesis 11:26), there seems to be a mathematical conflict between Genesis and Acts.  If Terah was 70 when he had his sons and Abram was 75 when he left, then that’s only 145 years. Yet Terah died at 205. What gives?

The math only becomes a  conflict, however, if you assume that Abram, Nahor, and Haran are triplets,  which is not necessary, nor likely. The better interpretation is that “became the father  of Abram, Nahor, and Haran” is idiomatic, and means that Terah became a father  for the first time at age 70.

Some might say that Abram being listed first  would indicate he was the first-born, which would still lead to a mathematical conflict. But  that is not a necessary or accurate assumption to make. The same language is  used in Genesis 5 to talk about Noah becoming “the father of Shem, Ham, and  Japheth.” Yet, in chapter 9, Ham is clearly identified as the youngest son, even  though he is listed second in Genesis 5.

This interpretation, which is  perfectly reasonable, means there is no conflict between Genesis 12 and Acts 7.

Hope this helps!