Biblical Chronology - Were the Israelites in Egypt for 430 Years?

The Passover Supper Olam, the Judaic instruction that computer addresses many issues of chronology in the Old Testament asseverates that the Hebrews only lived in Arab Republic Of Arab Republic Of Egypt for 215 old age because Bible records that there were only four coevals in Egypt. This averment depends on the followers information. The Book records the life spans of the four coevals from Matthew to Moses (Exodus 6:16-20): Matthew (137 years), Kohath (133 years), Amram (137 years) and Moses (120 years, recorded in the end of the book of Deuteronomy). The Book also records that Kohath was born before the children of State Of Israel left for Arab Republic Of Egypt (Genesis 46:7-11). Assuming Kohath was born on the twenty-four hours they left for Arab Republic Of Arab Republic Of Egypt the coevals of Kohath, Amram and Moses can not business relationship for 430 years, (the sum for these three coevals would be 350 years; 133 old age for Kohath, 137 old age for Amram and 80 old age for Moses).

Either the Book is wrong (the children of State Of Israel did not dwell in Egypt for 430 years) or there is missing information. Generally speaking there looks to be a batch of missing information in the books of Exodus, Numbers and Deuteronomy when it come ups to documenting the transition of time. If you were to seek and usage these books to document the household tree of any of the boys of State Of Israel from when they entered Arab Republic Of Egypt until they crossed the Jordan River River you could only follow one household tree for that period, the family of Joseph. According to the book of Numbers, chapter 26, during the 2nd nosecount in that book, the household of Chief Joseph had gone through 7 coevals from entering Arab Republic Of Egypt to very nearly leaving the wilderness to traverse the Jordan River River.

If you see the boys of Moses that were born in the wilderness, the household of Matthew had only gone through 5 generations. The household of Matthew (Moses) looks to be 2 coevals short! The family tree of Judah's boys gives similar results. Nahshon, the boy of Amminadab is mentioned as the caput of Judah in the first nosecount in the book of Numbers. The family tree of Jesus Of Nazareth Jesus mentioned in the Gospel of Saint Saint Matthew (Matthew, chapter 1) hints the family tree of Judah to Nahshon and it enters that there were 6 coevals from Judah to Nahshon. Since Nahshon is the leader of Judah during the time period of 40 old age when the Hebrews are wandering in the wilderness, he would be in the same coevals as Moses; Moses is the 4th Coevals of the line of Levi. Again, the household of Matthew looks to be 2 coevals short! If these two lacking coevals could be accounted for then it would have got been possible for the Hebrews to dwell in Arab Republic Of Egypt for 430 years. What explicates this difference in the figure of generations? I believe it affects how the Hebrews "adopted" children.

Consider the followers verse, (Matthew 1:11):

"And Josias (Josiah) begat Jechonias (Jeconiah) and his brethren, about the clip they were carried away to Babylon."

Josiah was killed in conflict eleven old age before he "begat" Jeconiah (2 Kings, chapter 24). How could Jeconiah be born 11 old age after his father had died? How could Jeconiah be born when the Bibles state he was 18 old age old? The Hebrew word that is translated "begat" in the King Jesse James Version of the Book can also intend "adopt". We also cognize that Zerubabbel, the male monarch of Judah in the book of Nehemiah, also had to be adopted because he had two fathers (Pedaiah and Shealtiel). See the followers poetry (Numbers 26:29):

"Of the boys of Manasseh: of Machir, the household of the Machirites: and Machir begat Gilead: of Gilead come up the household of the Gileadites."

How was Gilead "begat" from Machir when the poetries connotes that he is Manasseh's son? I believe Machir is adopted by Manasseh just like State Of Israel adopted Joseph's boys Manasseh and Ephraim. Now let's reconsider Moses's father, Amram. The book of Numbers (Numbers 26:58) sheds some visible light on the beginning of Amram:

"These are the households of the Levites: the household of the Libnites, the household of the Hebronites, the household of the Mahlites, the household of the Mushites, the household of the Korathites. And Kohath begat Amram."

Why makes this poetry not state that Kohath "begat" Amram's other brothers? Why doesn't this poetry reference which household Amram is a descendent of? The Hebronites, mentioned in this verse, are posterity of Hebron, one of Amram's brothers! I believe that something particular is being said about Amram; I believe that this poetry can be interpreted such as that Kohath (or his family) have adopted Amram. Amram's name come ups from two Hebrew words that average "high" and "people". I believe Amram's name intends "high people" or better translated "mountain people". If Amram is from a mountainous country he can't be from Egypt. The Hebrews certainly are not in a mountainous country while they are in Egypt. So where makes Amram come up from? There is an Amram in that clip period of time that is an Edomite and the Edomites lived near Saddle Horse Seir so Amram, the boy of Kohath, may have got also been that Edomite. I believe the adjacent poetry depicts why Amram is adopted by Kohath (Numbers 26:59):

"And the name of Amram's married woman was Jochebed, the girl of Levi, whom her female parent bare to Matthew in Egypt: and she bare unto Amram Henry Louis Aaron and Moses, and Miriam their sister."

Lets analyse this verse. The phrase "her mother" is not in the original Hebrew text; it was added by the English translators. The word "bare" is translated from the same Hebrew word as the word "begat" in the King Jesse James Version. According to the Hebrew grammatical regulations the pronoun "whom" mentions to the former clause, "the girl of Levi". However this poetry can't be interpreted "the girl of Matthew bare herself to Levi" because that would be non-sense. This probably confused the English transcribers so that is probably why they added the phrase "her mother" to break explicate the verse. What if the transcribers were wrong? What if the word "bare" is better translated "was adopted", then we wouldn't necessitate to add the words "her mother". The poetry would read as "...the girl of Levi, whom was adopted by Matthew (or the household of Levi) in Egypt..." This reading would intend that Jochebed was also adopted by the household of Levi. Therefore Jochebed and Amram were both adopted into the household tree of Israel. Amram was adopted because of his matrimony to Jochebed. Assuming this is true let's recapitulation this scenario.

If Jochebed is adopted by Levi, as we have got seen in the lawsuit of the acceptance of Jeconiah, Jochebed could be adopted by Matthew after he have died. This would explicate the "gap" of two coevals in the line of Levi. Amram (possibly a foreigner, an Edomite) marries Jochebed and is also adopted (by the household of Kohath) because he is the hubby of Jochebed. Therefore, since we make not cognize when this acceptance takes topographic point the sum old age of the four coevals of Matthew can not be calculated but this spread in the timeline of the four coevals of Matthew could account for the two lacking coevals I mentioned earlier. Therefore the fact that the children of State Of Israel lived in Arab Republic Of Egypt for 430 old age makes not belie the life spans of the four coevals of Matthew mentioned in the book of Exodus.