This guy is simply using the old skipped-generation theory, but you can nail him by pointing out that the age of each person from Levi through Amram is given in the Exodus 6 genealogy. If you use this information along with Jewish records like Josephus (*Antiquities of the Jews,* 2:9.6) and Philo Judaeus (*The Works of Philo,* Hendrickson: Peabody, MA, 1993, p. 459), both of whom said in the places cited that Moses was the 7th generation descendant of Abraham, you can establish that the Jews themselves clearly thought that Kohath was literally Levi's son, and Amram was literally Kohath's son, and Moses was literally Amram's son. Hence, the ages for Kohath (133), Amram (137), and Moses (80 at the time of the exodus, Ex. 7:7), simply do not allow enough time for a 430-year sojourn. Remember also my quotation from *the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,* which has Levi saying that Kohath was his son and Amram was Kohath's son. (This quotation is on page 9 of the latest issue of TSR.)
The problem is that Bible fundamentalists just won't stand still for letting the Jews interpret their own literature. Who is in a better position to know what the Jews of biblical times thought about the genealogy in Exodus 6, Jewish writers and scholars 2,000+ years ago or this guy that you're debating with?
<<Obviously by Moses' day (compare Num. 3:27-28) the total number of Amramites, Izharites, Hebronites, and Uzzielites came to 8,600, all of descended from Kohath, the Amram, who had perhaps one-fourth of 8,600 "children" (or 2,150). Obviously, he could not have been the immediate parent of Moses and Aaron unless one wishes to argue that they had over 2000 brothers in that one family! While Moses' father may in fact have been named Amram, he could not have been the same Amram as the one that produced that many descendants.>>
This is another familiar game that inerrantists play. They pit scripture against scripture and say (in this case), "Aha, Exodus 6 can't mean what you say it means, because if it does that conflicts with what is said in Numbers 3," but that's just the point. The Bible does contradict itself, and we can't let them prove inerrancy by assuming inerrancy. If the Exodus 6 genealogy says in plain language that Kohath was Levi's son, that Amram was Kohath's son, and that Moses was Amram's son, AND if respected Jewish scholars like Josephus and Philo Judaeus clearly indicated in their works that they understood it this way, AND if the combined ages of Kohath, Amram, and Moses (at the time of the exodus) simply will not allow time for a 430-year Israelite sojourn in Egypt, then that is a discrepancy. All that the information in Numbers 3 would prove is that another writer (your opponent, of course, will say that Moses wrote both books) had a different understanding, but that in no way removes the discrepancy.
<< Fortunately we can look to 1 Chronicles where we have several genealogies that are more complete, and these indicate that there were nine or ten generations between the sons of Jacob and the generation of Moses. For example, 1 Chronicles 7:25 tells us there were ten links between Ephraim and Joshua: Beriah to Rephah to Resheph to Telah to Tahan to Ladan to Ammihud to Elishama to Nun to Joshua. Bezalel, who designed the tabernacle (Exod. 31:2-11), was in the seventh generation from Jacob (cf. 1 Chron. 2:1,4-5,9,18-20). Elishama, mentioned in Numbers 1:10, was in the ninth generation from Jacob (1 Chron. 7:22-27).>>
Does you opponent want to look at the genealogies in 1 Chronicles? Okay, let's look at them. Every genealogy of Moses and Aaron that he can find here will list Levi, Kohath, Amram, and Moses (6:1-3 is an example), just as they are listed in Exodus 6. Clearly, the Jews thought that there had been only four generations from Levi to Moses and Aaron. The fact that other places and other genealogies mention up to 10 generations who lived in Egypt does not remove the fact that some writers thought that there had been only 4 from Levi to Moses. It only shows how discrepant the Bible is.
<< They are an atheists worst nightmare. Archer has written extensively in the field, and Josh McDowell pretty much laid to rest any claim that Christ's life cannot be proven.>>
Yeah, sure, Archer and McDowell are real nightmares to us poor pathetic, stupid atheists. That's why you couldn't run after either of them fast enough to get them to stand up in public forum with an informed opponent to defend their idiotic inerrancy arguments. Tell this opponent of yours to do me a favor and get either one of them to agree to a public debate.
F. Till