Ussher III

James Ussher in Catholic Apologetics · Ussher II · Ussher III · Ussher IV

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Ussher III · Φιλολoγικά / Philologica: Numeric Symbolism in Genesis 5 Patriarchs? · HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: Number Symbolism in Genesis 5? · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Ages or Names Symbolic?

Q

I was in a class today, and one of my teachers cited the John Ussher estimation of the age of the Earth, according to what he found in the Bible, which places the age of the Earth at around 6,000 years. More so indirectly defying this, they said that the Earth was billions of years old, which I think I believe. Is there something I am missing? Was John Ussher incorrect in his assumption in any way? How should I have responded? FYI this is a throwaway account.
https://catholicapologetics.quora.com/I-was-in-a-class-today-and-one-of-my-teachers-cited-the-John-Ussher-estimation-of-the-age-of-the-Earth-according-to-wh-21

T Michael Lutas

Can do basic arithmetic

Jun 14 2023

Ussher was the primate of all Ireland for the Anglican Church. He was one of a number of people working on this problem and they all came to about the same result, give or take a few years. Ussher never claimed, nor does anyone assert that he has any sort of theological infallibility to his pronouncement. It was a good-faith effort at a time of much lower levels of knowledge about the world that illustrates the problem of groupthink more than anything else.

The community of scholars trying to nail down the date of creation based on biblical genealogical accounts suffers from several difficulties. The first is that the Bible makes no claims that it is dictated by God. The entire time period prior to the appearance of man has no direct observer that is making claims. To even undergo such a project, you have to accept that the days of creation are literal days, not metaphorical days.

This literalist interpretation is not warranted by all evidence we have gathered in the scientific age. Metaphor is a common literary technique used in the Bible so this presents no theological issues with Christianity but is fatal to anyone seeking to get to the age of the Earth from the Biblical accounts of creation.

So, yes, Bishop Ussher erred. He had multiple errors, in fact but since you can fit many millennia of time unaccounted for in Ussher’s chronology into that first one, I’ll limit the critique to that error.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

26.VIII.2023

“The entire time period prior to the appearance of man has no direct observer that is making claims.”

Not even God?

“To even undergo such a project, you have to accept that the days of creation are literal days, not metaphorical days.”

If they are metaphors for, for instance, six mements in which angels looked around and saw all other things God had created, but had created in a single moment, this actually shortens the timeline very insignificantly, by six days.

Revisiting : “The entire time period prior to the appearance of man has no direct observer that is making claims.”

Wait - you are admitting Biblical history to be historical from chapter 2 of Genesis, are you? Because from “appearance of man” to Abraham visiting Pharaonic Egypt, we get 2084 years in Ussher and with the timeline of the Roman Martyrology, it would be 3260 years.

“anyone seeking to get to the age of the Earth from the Biblical accounts of creation.”

Genesis 5 and 11,12 are actually after the creation account of Genesis 1 and 2.

“Metaphor is a common literary technique used in the Bible”

What metaphors do you detect in this text in Genesis 11? Here:
10 These are the generations of Sem:* Sem was a hundred years old when he begot Arphaxad, two years after the flood. 11 And Sem lived after he begot Arphaxad, five hundred years, and begot sons and daughters. 12 And Arphaxad lived thirty-five years, and begot Sale. 13 And Arphaxad lived after he begot Sale, three hundred and three years, and begot sons and daughters. 14 Sale also lived thirty years, and begot Heber. 15 And Sale lived after he begot Heber, four hundred and three years: and begot sons and daughters. 16 And Heber lived thirty-four years, and begot Phaleg.

Come on! An important theological discovery may be lying in wait for me, once I decipher the metaphor here! Don’t be shy!

T Michael Lutas

26.VIII.2023

God is a direct observer. God’s not making claims on this particular issue. God isn’t allowing lies in the Bible. The Bible explicitly says that not everything is in the Bible. Thus, metaphorical vs literal 24-hour days is not definitively answered.

Usher assumes that nothing relevant to the task is omitted. God isn’t saying that. Usher is not qualified because he wasn’t there. Usher also does not claim divine revelation. Usher is just toting up time periods mentioned in the Bible.

I know that there is an entire discipline of Jewish numerology. I know I’m not anywhere near qualified or interested enough to get qualified in such an esoteric discipline. Wikipedia has an article that might help you get started though:

Significance of numbers in Judaism - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significance_of_numbers_in_Judaism

The idea that this topic is anything other than a well-chewed bone that has been covered by generations of theologians is laughable. Go find a Jewish mystic if you would like to discuss details.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

26.VIII.2023

"God’s not making claims on this particular issue"

But He is. He revealed it to Moses on Sinai. The six days, that is. He also excluded Day Age Theory and Gap Theory to the Apostles in Mark 10:6

"God isn’t allowing lies in the Bible."

Indeed not. That’s why I accept its chronological statements.

"The Bible explicitly says that not everything is in the Bible."

Sure - in a context where we are well advised to take the time span as exactly 40 days after the Resurrection, and not to take these as admitting ten more years of Jesus walking on the ground with His disciples.

So, you’d better not change it into a claim the Bible omits time periods.

"Thus, metaphorical vs literal 24-hour days is not definitively answered."

Not the point. A metaphorical day doesn't automatically equal a longer day, like an age.

"Usher assumes that nothing relevant to the task is omitted."

When it comes to time spans (more extensive than six days), Ussher is actually finding that.

A) Creation (of Adam) to God's promise to Abraham = Genesis 5 + 11.
B) God's promise to Abraham to Exodus = 430 years.
C) Exodus to Temple > 480 years. Ussher actually did a blunder in assuming the Exodus was exactly 480 years, the Israelites had been sloppy in keeping count of years from the Exodus up to then, so, already 390 years after it, you find Jephtha speaking of "300 years" = "at least 300 years" ...

480 Years From Exodus to Temple?
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2023/01/480-years-from-exodus-to-temple.html

BUT Exodus to Temple can't be very many decades beyond 480 years either, since:

• my add up from Judges doesn't need it
• genealogies like the descent from Israelite spies in Joshua's time won't allow for it.

D) Temple to Babylonian captivity = very detailed chronological information about the regnal times of each Davidic king. To double check, take the kings of North Kingdom who weren't Davidic.

"Usher is just toting up time periods mentioned in the Bible."

Very properly so. It's not as if there were gaps between them.

"I know that there is an entire discipline of Jewish numerology"

Sure. That doesn't anything like giving a clue on why we get the years mentioned in Genesis 5 or 11 genealogies, none of those numbers are there in the Jewish numerology article.

"Go find a Jewish mystic if you would like to discuss details."

YOU find a Jewish mystic who is willing to state symbolic significances for the ages of the patriarchs, you are the one making the claim. I refuse to go on a wild goose chase.

"The idea that this topic is anything other than a well-chewed bone that has been covered by generations of theologians is laughable."

If you mean generations of YEC theologians, you are right, but that claim doesn't fit the context in which you make it.

T Michael Lutas

27.VIII.2023

You claim that you accept its chronological statements but reject the idea that you might have misinterpreted those statements. Not even the Pope’s charism of infallibility covers private beliefs.

You might have a pride problem.

Usher had some priors which are not biblical, one of them being the metaphorical vs literal issue. I’m content living my life out without an exact answer to how old the world is. I am more concerned with the stumbling blocks to the salvation of others that you and other YEC fanatics are placing in front of your brothers and sisters who have a scientific bent.

So no, I’m not making claims as to the age of the Earth. I’m uncovering issues that you haven’t addressed and need to before you make definitive pronouncements as to the age of the Earth as established by the Bible.

I am confident that there’s some way to square the circle on this question that I am not that invested in and would like the fewest people possible kept out of Heaven because of this triviality.

But you insist on making it harder for people to get into Heaven for a point that ultimately doesn’t matter. Shame on you.

Me pointing out that there is a mystical numerological tradition in Judaism that might be the source of particular numbers taken literally by Usher doesn’t manufacture an obligation for me to nail down what they say. It means that there’s an entire biblical tradition that you’re closing your eyes to that is very relevant to your subject of research. It’s evidence that you’re sloppy and should not be taken seriously.

In that spirit, I will ignore your offensive “you better not” threat.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

27.VIII.2023

"You claim that you accept its chronological statements but reject the idea that you might have misinterpreted those statements"

Did you read my link about the 480 years?

480 Years From Exodus to Temple?
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2023/01/480-years-from-exodus-to-temple.html

I am making it glaringly obvious that anyone could be excused for not exactly getting the chronological statements about the period from Exodus to Temple.

I am not venturing any opinion of my own, was just gliding onto this issue in a scientific way by seeing an opposition between statements:

• Christ is born 1510 after Exodus and 1032 after ANOINTING OF KING DAVID
• the temple was built c. 51 years after the anointing (40 years of rule + 11 years into King Solomon's reign
• the temple is said to be completed 480 years after the Exodus

"Not even the Pope’s charism of infallibility covers private beliefs."

I don't know whose private beliefs you mean, but if you mean the subject matter is one of private belief, no.

• Traditionally, Christ is born 5199 after the Creation of Heaven and Earth
• CCC §283 to modernists defines acceptance of new "scientific" discoveries about the age of the earth and the universe.

Both trads and mods have Church authority to appeal to, in two different and clearly opposed directions.

"Usher had some priors which are not biblical, one of them being the metaphorical vs literal issue."

As said, it only concerns 6 days. PLUS in order to keep Adam created 7000 years ago, all men descending from him, and no anatomical men being degraded to subhuman despite evidence they were human, you need to discard carbon dates, for one.

I, as YEC, can recalibrate them, as there may have been no C14 in the atmosphere at all on day 4. You can't even do that, you need to discard them.

If on the other hand you accept there were human creatures 40 000 years ago, you have issues with dogma far beyond literality of the six days.

"I am more concerned with the stumbling blocks to the salvation of others that you and other YEC fanatics are placing in front of your brothers and sisters who have a scientific bent."

In other words, a scientific bent = acceptance of Deep Time?

In other words, accepting the Roman Martyrology, Historia Scholastica and a few more as chronologically correct is ... fanaticism?

In other words, no one can remove the possible stumbling block by making a good case (with scientific backing to it) that Earth is actually about as old scientifically as the Bible says it is exactly?

Come on.

The FANATIC here is YOU, and YOUR priest. He is not Catholic, you are wrong to believe he keeps you Catholic, he's leading you to uncharitable judgements against the neighbour, and pretending to do so for the greater good of souls. Yes, I said pretending.

Probably, the Pharisees pretended the early Christian community posed a hazard for the proselytisation of Roman occupants too ...

"Me pointing out that there is a mystical numerological tradition in Judaism that might be the source of particular numbers taken literally by Usher"

Means you need to be able to make some kind of case. OR direct me to a Jewish numerologist who does that.

"It means that there’s an entire biblical tradition that you’re closing your eyes to that is very relevant to your subject of research."

Are you aware that most of Jewish numerology is actually post-Christian speculation?

In other words, it cannot realistically be taken as back-drop for how the text was formed.

The sloppy guy is actually you.

“I will ignore your offensive “you better not” threat.”

Taking it as a threat, and taking offense at it, is your problem. I was warning you against actual sloppiness.

T Michael Lutas

27.VIII.2023

You are making things clear that you wish to be disagreeable and pick a fight.

Go with God.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

27.VIII.2023

I think the one picking a fight was you, but I’m OK with it.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

27.VIII.2023

Btw, read with God, here is our debate and a few more ones:

James Ussher in Catholic Apologetics · Ussher II · Ussher III · Ussher IV

PS - see also:
Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Numeric Symbolism in Genesis 5 Patriarchs?
https://filolohika.blogspot.com/2023/08/numeric-symbolism-in-genesis-5.html

AND

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS : Number Symbolism in Genesis 5?
https://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2023/08/number-symbolism-in-genesis-5.html

AND

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : Ages or Names Symbolic?
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2023/09/ages-or-names-symbolic.html