I agree that Christ could not have been born after the death of Herod since he is part of the narrative of the nativity story, which is part of scripture and inspired of the Holy Spirit. From generation to generation, scripture has been proven trustworthy. We must be very careful when weighing the truth from secular sources, especially if they seem to conflict with God's word. Archeologists are making discoveries all the time, and rewriting decades of 'historical fact'.

All in on Tishrei 1, 6029.

The math also reveals that if the Flood were to have occurred in the year 1656, as so many timelines depict, then it would have started on the 7th day of a week (Sabbath). - The fountains of the deep breaking up - God shutting Noah and his family in the Ark - Everything breathing being on earth in sudden fear of death Does this sound like a Sabbath day of rest to you? The math agrees with scripture which tells us about the Flood timing in Genesis 5, 7 and 8. The Flood event actually occurred in the year 1657. This highlights the difference between the ages given in scripture, and the even occurrence (when it is plotted on a timeline).

I wanted to give everyone the first shot at seeing what was revealed to me, but I know that not everyone is enthusiastic about the same things. LOL I find it very interesting that the original design of the year (360 days, 12 months of 30 days each) corresponds with the rest of scripture so well. It contains the 7 day cycle which we know from the creation week. But it extends to the months and years as well. It takes 7 months for the first day of a month to return to being the first day of the week. It takes 7 years for the first day of the year to return to being the first day of the week. There are exactly 12 months, in 7 years, that start on the first day of the week. The 360 day year established a 7 day cycle, a 7 month cycle and a 7 year cycle.

Sounds like, "that is enough" or something in another language perhaps. Would be a good one to share with L.A. Marzulli.

The State of Israel becomes 75 years old this week, the age when Abram first entered the Land. It will be very interesting to see how things develop between now and eclipse.

I was talking with the wife yesterday and, it was kind of strange, but we'd both noticed an uptick in talk about anti-Semitism. I noticed that the prophecy discussion programs that I watch and read, seem to be talking about it a lot more. Sometimes, the entire program. I don't think that it's because of the recent Passover time, or the Holocaust memorial. It's been unashamed in Congress, it's in the news, and it's in commercials. My wife watches all sorts of entertainment programs (that I cannot stand) and she was noticing it there too. I think awareness is important, but it doesn't seem to be about that. Has anyone else noticed?

The attached file has been updated to include separate tabs for the timing of the birth of Abraham.

Our small town of Whiteland Indiana played host to a tornado this past weekend. So the power was out until yesterday. I have finished updating the excel file with two more tabs for the adjusted portion of the timeline, but probably won’t be able to upload it until tomorrow. I’ll upload it to the 7049 Timeline post.

That last portion is very interesting. The 7049 Timeline shows 352 years from the reign of Rehoboam to the destruction of the first temple. A difference of only 7 years from Thiel’s work. Not bad considering the only source is scripture. LOL

I think we agree that scripture indicates that Adam was 130 years old when Seth was born. Since Adam was created on the sixth day of the first year, he didn't turn 130 years old until the sixth day of the 131st year. This means that Seth could only have been born at some point after the sixth day of the 131st year. (It's possible that Seth could have been born within the first week of the 132nd year but I doubt that either of us would argue for that.) It seems that there are two ways to look at this, and depending on which question you're asking, will determine the answer. If the question is, how old was the Earth when Seth was born, then the answer would be 130 years. If the question is, in what year was Seth born, then the answer would be, in the year 131. The first is used in reference to an age, whereas the second is used to correctly plot the event on a timeline. For example purposes only, if we were to add a day and a month to the timeline plot of the year, it could be correct to say that Seth was born on day 5 in the 7th month in the year 131. However, it would be incorrect to say that Seth was born on day 5 in the 7th month in the year 130. This is not possible because Adam had not yet turned 130 years old by this point on the timeline. Not trying to teach here, simply trying to give a reasonable explanation for why the 7049 Timeline events are plotted a little differently than most of the other timelines that I have seen.

That sounds good, but I need the weekend off. LOL Let’s take it up again on Monday.

Brother, here is a copy/paste of your second paragraph from the previous post. "Now, let's do Moses' chronology. We know Moses was born 325 years after Isaac was born. You say he was born in 2435 AM (no change). 1) 4000 BC - 2435 AM = 1565 BC. 2) 4000 BC - 1565 BC = 2435 AM. Your timeline chronology for the birth of Moses is now 1565 BC and not 1525 BC, which is what it should be by historical accounts. This isn't real clear until we get to some verifiable historical records, such as the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in 586 BC." You started by subtracting the AM date from 4000 BC. That doesn't work. You have to subtract BC from BC to get the AM date. Fortunately, you corrected it in your most recent post. I appreciate that you pointed out the passage from Acts 7. As for the birth of Abraham, there appear to be two camps on this issue. I am convinced it's possible that either (not both) could be correct. Therefore, it is worth doing research for both. I'm willing to look. From your verbiage, you seem to hold your timeline very personal. I apologize if my comments have caused any harm. That is not my intent. I'm not hear to teach, I'm here to share what scripture has revealed to me, and to discuss it with others that are interested in the subject. If that's you, I hope that our conversation can continue.

What you have written does not represent the 7049 Timeline (A-130) Isaac - 2110 Moses - 2437 They are separated by 327 years. I don't know why you keep relating the 7049 Timeline research to Newton. The natural thing to do when making a timeline based on scripture is to start with creation, 'in the beginning'. Creation is the obvious starting point. If Newton did this as well, I suppose I'm in good company, along with every other guy that takes world history from scripture. I don't see why BC/AD should be the 'standard' when the fulcrum of that system is subjective. Scripture doesn't start in the middle, the timeline shouldn't either. Every event that is listed on the linear tab of the 7049 Timeline (A-70) and (A-130) contains the scripture reference that places the event. The only reference material needed is scripture. I would be careful with basing what is 'known' about history on secular documentation. I'm sure that you know modern archeology is biased against the Bible, no matter what they dig up. Only God's word is thoroughly trustworthy. By the way, in your second paragraph, you used 2435 AM as the date for Moses birth. That is not the 7049 Timeline date for Moses birth (2437 AM). Also, the math in this paragraph makes no sense. BC dates should be subtracted from 4000 to find the AM date. You subtracted the AM date from 4000 and came up with junk. OOPS! In the third paragraph you plugged in your own timeline date for the exodus (2514 AM), not that of the 7049 Timeline (2518 AM), and then you did the conversion backwards again. Like you said, no wonder the calculations are 'off'... LOL Perhaps we should stop trying to teach each other and just find one specific item to discuss.

The only events that needed to be updated were the lives and events of: Abraham, Sarah, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Esau, and Joseph. The births of Aaron and Moses do not need to be moved, nor anything thereafter. The 7049 Timeline (A-70) plots the exodus at the end of the 4th generation (278 years). The 7049 Timeline (A-130) plots the exodus at the beginning of the 4th generation (218 years). No change needed for the exodus (2518AM) or anything thereafter.

Not at all. Creation is the start of the 7049 Timeline. Adam was formed from the dust of the earth on the sixth day of the first year (Year 1), and died at the age of 930, in the year 931. Exactly 133 Shemitah cycles, or 49 Metonic Lunar cycles (19 years each). So on and so forth…

I thought that I mentioned before that I am working on a 7049 Timeline (A130) that will adjust the birth of Abraham from the year 1949AM to 2009AM. It also moves Isaac's birth from 2050AM to 2110AM. Once I get the Factor grids updated, I'll post a file that contains both versions. It appears that our timelines differ by one year from Adam to Noah, but they are mostly synchronized through the Exodus. If you are interested, the post about the year that Seth was born shows why the first 10 patriarchs are a year apart in our timelines.

I believe that from the Rapture to the Thousand-Year Reign of Christ will be a 15 year period that follows the template of the Levitical feasts that occur in the 7th month (Tishrei). 1 - Feast of Trumpets (Rapture) (7 year Tribulation occurs from 3-10 *overlapping) 10 - Day of Atonement (Second Coming of Christ) 15 - Feast of Tabernacles (Thousand-Year Reign of Christ begins) Using Leviticus 23 as the template, there is no place for a mid-Tribulation rapture (other than what nettlesr pointed out with the 2 witnesses).

Are you able to Reply in the other Post, 'In what year was Seth born?' If so, we can continue the conversation over there. This one's getting long. LOL

Interesting topic for sure, and I enjoy the speculation concerning the imagery of stepping from the pinnacle of the temple. One thing though, concerning the 'was' and 'is' and 'is to come'. All of that is part of Jesus ישוע being that same 'LORD' יהוה who was first mentioned in Genesis 2:4. The Hebrew letters from LORD can be rearranged into the Hebrew words for 'was' 'is' and 'is to come'. So it's okay for Him to be 'was' and 'is to come', since He (Jesus) 'is' the LORD!