A dissertation on the true age of the world : $b in which is determined the chronology of the period from creation to the Christian eraWallace, R. (Robert)
Religion
A dissertation on the true age of the world : $b in which is determined the chronology of the period from creation to the Christian era
Wallace, R. (Robert)
Bible; Chronology; Chronology, Historical
respect is a strong argument in favour of the more natural proportion of
the Septuagint. But men in all ages have endeavoured to reduce the
Antediluvian standard of human life and generation, without regard to
the actual record of Holy Scripture. Some curious specimens of reasoning
on this point will be found in Usher’s “Syntagma,” cap. ii. p. 13 et
seq. What, for instance, can be more ridiculous than the following
remark on this subject by the learned Dr. Isaac Barrow? “No one,” says
he, “can pretend to assert, as a certainty, that the age of Methusalem
[Methuselah!] himself, who lived _a thousand years wanting one_, [999
instead of 969!] was really longer than that of a man, who now dies at
_a hundred_! _Why might not the Sun, being then younger and more
vigorous, have performed his periods ten times sooner than at this
time?_” See his “Geometrical Lectures,” translated by Stone, 1735.
_Credat Judæus!_
Dr. Russell states that Augustine was not aware that 400 years had
elapsed from the time when the Septuagint version was made, before any
discrepancy between the Greek and the Hebrew Scriptures was ever
imagined to exist; and that there flourished in that interval, the
chronographers Demetrius, Philo, Euphorus, Eupolemus, and Polyhistor, in
whose writings, compiled from the books of Moses, we find the events,
numbers, dates and proper names, agreeing with the Septuagint, but
differing from the modern Hebrew. The ignorance of this early Father in
reference to these writers, though it were admitted, for which however
we see no good reason, and his want of reference to the works of
Josephus, form no ground of objection whatever to the facts of the case;
nor can we conclude from his silence regarding their testimony that he
was not biassed in favour of the Jewish system of chronology in
consequence of the high authority of Jerome in the Christian Church. Dr.
Russell gives a very full and clear account of the manner in which this
system originated. He states that the publication of the _Seder Olam
Rabba_ in A.D. 130, may with certainty be regarded as the epoch at which
the Jews altered their genealogies and changed the dates of the great
events which are recorded in their Sacred Books; and that Theophilus,
bishop of Antioch, was the first Christian chronologer who attempted to
compute the age of the world from the facts and dates only which are
contained in the Bible. He judiciously remarks that the bishop must have
possessed a copy of the Hebrew Scriptures or at least of the Pentateuch,
which had escaped the innovations of the Jews; for his dates of the
deluge and the birth of Abraham differ from both the Hebrew and the
Septuagint.[59] Moreover, we find that Eusebius, in the middle of the
fourth century, who was well aware of the discrepancies between the
Hebrew and the Septuagint in the matter of chronology, still writes as
follows: “On all sides therefore the version of the _Seventy_, being
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account