Exurge, Calvinisti, et judica causam tuam...

drstevej (Pope Piel I)

[ponyespresso]

Save for my own study.

pony

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

An aside, I'm not into Bishop Ussher's chronology for the young earth, which uses a number of assumptions I disagree with. I'm personally more a believer in a timescale of perhaps 10,000 or so years for that theory. At the very least, I favor the Septuagint count and disfavor the Masoretic.

I've read that Luke's chronology tends to support the Septuagint as being a more complete record than the Masoretic, although the inflation of the ages of some Patriarchs in the LXX is presumed suspect due to possible Egyptian influence... (shrugs)

So I usually just say "over 6,000", which is certainly true (even if short by a couple millenia).

You do have to admire (if not necessarily admit) the attempt at absolute precision on the part of Bishop John Lightfoot, who further specified that the Creation week lasted from October 18-23, 4004 BC, and that Adam was created on October 23 at 9 a.m. forty-fifth meridian time. Concerning this, one scholar sarcastically remarked: “Closer than this, as a cautious scholar, the Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University did not venture to commit himself”. Hah!!

---

I think I may just respond to your last pre-Christmas post to me on this thread, Herm -- I'll let you know. First I need to post an article from DR. FN Lee which I will be using for reference, though, so it'll be just a bit longer yet (mea culpa). best, OP