Let us now examine the internal evidence afforded by these tables in favour of our argument. On looking at Table III., we perceive that the _whole lives_ of these Patriarchs, with the exception of that of Lamech, are all exactly the same, both in the Hebrew and the Septuagint; but that in the Samaritan, three of them are very considerably different, namely, those of Jared, Methuselah, and Lamech. It is plain, therefore, that we must prefer the testimony of the two former witnesses to that of the latter. Moreover, it is evident that the lives of the three Patriarchs in question have been shortened in the Samaritan, in order that their deaths should be represented as all occurring in the _year of the flood_, see Table II.; for, had their lives been preserved as entire in this text, as in the other two, they would, contrary to the express words of Scripture, have _survived the flood_ by 115, 249, and 100 years respectively! The evidence of the Samaritan text being thus clearly excluded, we have only to settle the claims of the other two witnesses on the question of the life of Lamech. As in this case all the witnesses differ in their statements, we are deprived of the evidence of double testimony, and we must resort to another test of the truth. In the mean time it is proper to observe that the _date of the flood from creation_ will not, in the slightest degree, be affected by the discrepancy of the three texts on this point. The most striking discrepancies, however, are to be found in the first two Tables. On looking at Table I., we perceive that _six_ of the Hebrew _Antepaidogonian_ ages, namely, the first five, and the seventh, have been _diminished_ by the exact number of 100 years; for, omitting that of Noah, which is the same in all, the remaining _three_ agree with those of the Septuagint, with the exception of six years only, in that of Lamech. Again:—On looking at Table II., we perceive that the _six_ Hebrew _Postpaidogonian_ ages, corresponding to the six former ages, have been _increased_ by the exact number of 100 years; for, the remaining _three_, corresponding to the three former ages, agree with those of the Septuagint, with the exception of 30 years in that of Lamech. It is manifest, therefore, on the slightest consideration of the question, that the _centenary increase_ of the _six Hebrew Postpaidogonian_ ages was made to balance the _centenary decrease_ of the _six Hebrew Antepaidogonian_ ages, in order to preserve the integrity of the _whole lives_ of the Patriarchs. These discrepancies, especially the _regular centenary difference_ which occurs six times, have led to the uniform opinion among almost all chronologers, from the period of their first discovery, in the second century, till the present day, that they were _the work of design or artifice_, and not the offspring of chance or mistake!