inkpot & quill logo of Badgerholt
Return to blog post
Return to ICB Menu

The Internal Chronology of the Bible -- Stepping Stones

Who Was Born First?
A Look at Terah's Sons

by D.M. Doede


Then Nöãch became a son of five hundred year (500 years) ~ and Nöãch caused to bring forth Shëm, Chäm, and Yäpheth # (Genesis 5.32, dmd translation) Then Terach lived 70 years ~ and he caused to bring forth @Avräm, Nächôr, and Härän # (Genesis 11.26, dmd translation)

Another Question The essay "Who Was Born First? A Look at Noah's Sons" establishes that Genesis 5.32 does not list Noah's sons in birth order. It also establishes from Scripture that their birth order was Japheth, Shem, and Ham. Given the similarity between the genealogical formula used for the listing of Noah's sons in Genesis 5.32 and the one used for the listing of Terah's sons in Genesis 11.26, the question arises: Are Terah's sons are listed in birth order? Or, is Abram another second son who was shifted to the first position because, like Shem, the Abrahamic/Davidic line (the Line of the Promise) ran through him? Scripture does not give as clear cut an answer to the birth order of Terah's sons, but it does provide sufficient information from which to deduce an answer. Genealogical Formula First of all, the genealogical formula listing more than one son is used only for Noah and Terah. All other generations in the Genesis 5 and 11 lists name only the son continuing the line and no brothers. Is this a mere coincidence or deliberate? Given the similarities between the Genesis 5 and Genesis 11 lists,(1) it seems likely that the Terah listing was written in deliberate imitation of the Noah listing with the son through whom the Line of the Promise (Abrahamic or Davidic line) ran listed first and the eldest son shifted to the last position. But does Scripture say anything else relevant to the birth order of Terah's sons? Another Logic Puzzle

Then Terach lived 70 years ~ and he caused to bring forth @Avräm, Nächôr, and Härän # (Genesis 11.26, dmd translation) and the days of Terach became five years and two hundred years, and Terach died in Chärän # S <> (Genesis 11.323 At that time he went out from the land of the Chaldeans to dwell in Charrán. From thence after the death of his father, He [God] transferred him to this land, the same in which you now dwell. (Acts 7.4) Now @Avräm [was] a son of five and 70 years in his going out from Chärän # (Genesis 12.4b) So, after @Avräm had lived ten years in the land of Keanaøan, Sarai, @Avräm's wife, took Hägär the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram her husband as a wife. (Genesis 16.3) @Avräm was eighty-six years old when Hägär bore Yishmäøë@l to @Avräm. (Genesis 16.16)

1) Terah was 70 years old when he became a father. He died at age 205. Therefore, his eldest son would have been 135 years old when he died in Charran. 2) Abram left Charran when he was 75 years old, after his father died. He was 86 years old when Ishmael was born, which means that they had lived in Canaan for 11 years. Therefore, YHWH @Élöhîm must have moved him out of Charran immediately after his father's death at age 205. 3) If Abram was 75 years old when Terah was 205 years old, then Terah was 130 years old when Abram was born. Thus, Abram cannot be Terah's eldest son. Knowing that Abram was not Terah's eldest son establishes that, like the listing of Noah's sons, the Genesis listings of Terah's sons are not in birth order. However, that does not answer the question of who was born first: Abram, Nahor, or Haran? Neither does it prove that the birth order of Terah's sons mimics the birth order of Noah's sons, although that is still a very likely scenario. Birth Order of Terah's sons: Haran, Abram, and Nahor

Terach caused to bring forth @Avräm, Nächôr, and Härän ~ and Härän caused to bring forth Lôt # Then Härän died in the presence of Terach his father ~ in the land of his birth, in @Ûr Käsdîm # Then @Avräm and Nächôr took wives to themselves ~ the name of the wife of @Avräm [was] Säräy and the name of the wife of Nächôr [was] Milkäh, the daughter of Härän, the father of Milkäh and the father of Yiskäh # Now Säray happened [to be] barren ~ not to her a child # Then Terach took himself with @Avräm his son, and with Lôt the son of Härän, the son of his son, and Säräy his daughter-in-law, the wife of @Avräm his son ~ and they went out with themselves (together) from @Ûr Käsdîm in order to go to the land of Kenaôan and they went as far as Chärän and they remained there # and the days of Terach became five years and two hundred years, and Terach died in Chärän # S <> (Genesis 11.27-32, dmd transl.)

The writing structure of Genesis 11.27-32 is very telling in this case. This passage has three distinct sections. The first section introduces Terah and his sons. It then provides information about Haran and his son Lot, concluding with Haran's death. The second section provides information about Abram and Nahor and their wives, concluding with the note about Sarai being barren. The third section continues the story of Terah to his death in Charran. Working on the premise that Dr. Custance's(2) hypothesis is correct, that Haran (the father of Lot) and Haran (the father of Milkah and Iscaah) are two different men, this passage sets out the information about Haran the son of Terah first, completes it, and then moves on to the other brothers. It then completes the information about Abram and Nahor and their wives before moving on to Terah's information. Does this passage mention Haran first because he was the eldest son? That seems rather likely. The next son mentioned is Abram, followed by Nahor. This birth order would then be Haran, Abram, and Nahor, which parallels the birth order of Noah's sons, Japheth, Shem, and Ham. It seems likely that the use of a parallel formula was deliberate. Traditional Interpretations The idea that Abram was the eldest son of Terah and born when Terah was 70 years old is firmly established in both the Jewish and Christian traditions, just as the idea that Shem was the eldest son of Noah is firmly established. This understanding is found in nearly all writings for centuries, even millennia, but it's a misunderstanding based on the assumption that Noah's and Terah's sons are listed in birth order. At some point in time, it was forgotten that Genesis 5.32 and Genesis 11.26 do not list Noah's and Terah's sons in birth order and that Shem and Abram were second sons. The reading became literal. This reading has persisted down through the generations and led to inaccuracy in Jewish and Christian writings for millennia. Fortunately, Rûãch @Élöhîm provided clues in His written word for those who questioned the birth order to find the clues and to deduce the truth. The traditional understanding simply does not stand up to a detailed examination of the relevant Scriptures and the context of the genealogical formulas in Genesis 5 and 11. Conclusion While Scripture does not provide as definitive answer to the birth order of Terah's sons as it does for the birth order of Noah's sons, there is enough circumstantial evidence in Scripture to conclude that the birth order of Terah's sons was Haran, Abram, and Nahor.

FOOTNOTES (1) See dmd essay, "The Genesis Line of the Promise Formulas." Return (2) See dmd essay "A Question of Two Harans" Return Return to blog post Return to ICB Menu


Site Creator: Dori       This page last modified: February 4, 2021       Send correspondance to: dori@badgerholt.com Legal Stuff:   Copyright 2021 by D.M. Doede. All rights reserved.   Permission to distribute this material via e-mail, or individual copies for personal use, is granted on the condition that it will be used for non-commercial purposes, will not be sold, and no changes made to the format or content.   When quoting, please keep the context and provide the source   URL: https://www.badgerholt.com.       Scriptures are cited from New American Standard Bible (NASB), English Standard Version (ESV) Young's Literal Translation (YLT), Geneva Bible, 1599 ed., Jay Green's KJ3' Literal Translation, Gary Zella's Analytical Literal Translation of the New Testament, or my own translation (dmd).