Population Question

[C. Matthew McMahon]

According to Biblical genealogies and timelines, the earth had populated rapidly in three hundred years from the Flood to the development of large empires like the Egyptian, Babylonian and Hittites.

How do you think such a rapid expansion happened? Over 300 years, do you think that is enough time, or the dating that we've come up with off a little? or is it that "empire" to us is much bigger than to history?

 

[Casey]

It's funny you should bring this up. Actually, I have thought about this before. Through pure speculation, I've come to the conclusion that even larger cities were rather small by today's standards. We read of armies of a few hundred thousand people, at most a million, right? If that represented the size of the armies of some of the largest nations/empires, and we presume that the army was constituted of most of the men of said nation, that would mean we ought to be thinking in smaller numbers.

 

[Anton Bruckner]

using population formulas + the long life span of the ancients it is reasonable that the earth could have been populated extensively, and this is not including God's blessing which the ancients did get.

 

[Henry from Canada]

I have asked myself the very same question in the past.

This is the best answer I can come up with. I hope it is close to being right.

I figure the flood happened around 2500 BC.

At 2500 BC, there were 8 people, and I figure 3 fertile couples.

These 3 couples had 16 sons according to the Bible. They probably had 15-20 daughters.

The total population by 2460 BC was probably at least 40. This would include the 'original 8' plus 30 children, plus the young children of the original 8's older children. By 2460, there were probably 4 generations co-existing on Earth.

With my assumptions, Earth's population increased by a factor of 5 in just 40 years (8 x 5 = 40).

Now the issue is: Is it reasonable to assume that couples average 10 children (5 sons, 5 daughters)?

I believe so. The Bible is loaded with examples of families with 10 or more children. For example, Jacob had 12 sons. Moreover, before 1940, many families in the US had about 10 children.

Anyway, let's say the population increases by a factor of 5 every 40 years, this is how the population can skyrocket:

2500 BC population of 8
2460 BC 40
2420 BC 200
2380 BC 1,000
2340 BC 5,000
2300 BC 25,000
2260 BC 125,000
2220 BC 625,000
2180 BC 3,125,000 (around Abraham's time)
2140 BC 15,625,000
2100 BC 78,125,000
2060 BC 312,500,000

These calculations don't factor in extremely long lifespans enjoyed by some people just after the flood. There could have been 10 - 15 generations co-existing when Shem was alive. This could have further increased population.

These calculations also don't factor in 'short' generations in which 20 year old women give birth to children, who in turn give birth when they are 20....

The point of the above calculations is to show how in 300 years, you can easily go from 8 people to hundreds of thousands.

On the other hand, when I read of Abraham's travels, I am often struck by how in one sense, it was still a small world. The world was so small that even powerful leaders knew he existed and had a beautiful wife. It was so small he and Lot could explore relatively uninhabited - fertile - areas in the Middle East.

Therefore, in one sense Abraham's world may have had small spreadout populations, but on the other hand Abraham's world may have had empires with thousands of troops.

When I read history, I am often struck how nations can change greatly over 100 or so years. 140 years ago, the US only had about 33 million people. An Indian fellow once told me that 100 years ago, India only had about 200 million people, and that because of that India was a far different place.

 

[Puritan Sailor]

Just multiply exponentially. Noah had 3 sons. They each had over 3 sons each. There sons had more than 3, most likely more, especially when polygamy comes back on the scene. The average life span if we go with the biblical examples was over 100 years old. There was plenty of room to grow too, most likely not alot of war immediately after Babyl because everyone spread out.

So lets say for arguments sake, that Noah's descendents have an average of 6 children (3 boys, 3 girls) with 25 years marking each generation. You would start with Noah's boys, so 6.
6 + 36 + 216 + 1296 = 1554. So after 100 years, with these assumptions, you have 1554 people. We could easily assume they had much more children than that, so there could be exponentially more people. You can see how fast that rate would grow over 300 years.

There's a population growth equation from Henry Morris, on pg. 199 of the book, Scientific Studies on Special Creation.

Let's see if I can manage to get it in this font and still make sense.

`````````n-x+1```x``````( <---- these are exponents of C)
Pn= _2_ (C`````) (C - 1)
````C-1
(sorry, I had to use the tic marks to get the right spacing)

n= number of generations you want to measure
C= number of couples produced per parental couple
x= number of generations a set of parents will live to see of their offspring born (i.e. 2= children and grandchildren).

Here's an example Morris gives.
c=2 (therefore 4 children, grow up to produce 2 families (1 man,1 woman each))
x= 2 (parents live to see all children and grandchildren born)
n= 5 generations

Plug that into the formula and you end up with 96 people after 5 generations. Assume a generation is 35 years and you would then have 96 people by 175 years. Now plug in 10 generations (35 years a peice) and after 350 years you have 3070 people. After 30 generations or 1050 years, you would have 3,220,000,000 people. This is using relatively conservative estimates. You may adjust the variables however you like. Morris uses Ussher's chronology to date the flood to present time, assuming c=1.24, and that a generation is 43 years, and assuming x=1 (parents only lived to see their children grow up), you would have a population of 3 billion people. These are very conservative estimates though.

I also like Morris's point that no matter how you add it up, even accounting for wars and disease, it s "glaringly evident" that the human race is not that old. I don't know if this book is still in print but it's a great read if you like the scientific stuff.


[Edited on 11-11-2005 by puritansailor]

 

[C. Matthew McMahon]

Great stuff guys. I hadn't thought through it all the way. That's very helpful.