Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/City of God/Book XV/Chapter 14

Chapter 14.—That the Years in Those Ancient Times Were of the Same Length as Our Own.

Let us now see how it can be plainly made out that in the enormously protracted lives of those men the years were not so short that ten of their years were equal to only one of ours, but were of as great length as our own, which are measured by the course of the sun.&#160; It is proved by this, that Scripture states that the flood occurred in the six hundredth year of Noah&#8217;s life.&#160; But why in the same place is it also written, “The waters of the flood were upon the earth in the six hundredth year of Noah&#8217;s life, in the second month, the twenty-seventh day of the month,” if that very brief year (of which it took ten to make one of ours) consisted of thirty-six days?&#160; For so scant a year, if the ancient usage dignified it with the name of year, either has not months, or this month must be three days, so that it may have twelve of them.&#160; How then was it here said, “In the six hundredth year, the second month, the twenty-seventh day of the month,” unless the months then were of the same length as the months now?&#160; For how else could it be said that the flood began on the twenty-seventh day of the second month?&#160; Then afterwards, at the end of the flood, it is thus written:&#160; “And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat.&#160; And the waters decreased continually until the eleventh month:&#160; on the first day of the month were the tops of the mountains seen.” &#160; But if the months were such as we have, then so were the years.&#160; And certainly months of three days each could not have a twenty-seventh day.&#160; Or if every measure of time was diminished in proportion, and a thirtieth part of three days was then called a day, then that great deluge, which is recorded to have lasted forty days and forty nights, was really over in less than four of our days.&#160; Who can away with such foolishness and absurdity?&#160; Far be this error from us,—an error which seeks to build up our faith in the divine Scriptures on false conjecture only to demolish our faith at another point.&#160; It is plain that the day then was what it now is, a space of four-and-twenty hours, determined by the lapse of day and night; the month then equal to the month now, which is defined by the rise and completion of one moon; the year then equal to the year now, which is completed by twelve lunar months, with the addition of five days and a fourth to adjust it with the course of the sun.&#160; It was a year of this length which was reckoned the six hundredth of Noah&#8217;s life, and in the second month, the twenty-seventh day of the month, the flood began,—a flood which, as is recorded, was caused by heavy rains continuing for forty days, which days had not only two hours and a little more, but four-and-twenty hours, completing a night and a day.&#160; And consequently those antediluvians lived more than 900 years, which were years as long as those which afterwards Abraham lived 175 of, and after him his son Isaac 180, and his son Jacob nearly 150, and some time after, Moses 120, and men now seventy or eighty, or not much longer, of which years it is said, “their strength is labor and sorrow.”

But that discrepancy of numbers which is found to exist between our own and the Hebrew text does not touch the longevity of the ancients; and if there is any diversity so great that both versions cannot be true, we must take our ideas of the real facts from that text out of which our own version has been translated.&#160; However, though any one who pleases has it in his power to correct this version, yet it is not unimportant to observe that no one has presumed to emend the Septuagint from the Hebrew text in the many places where they seem to disagree.&#160; For this difference has not been reckoned a falsification; and for my own part I am persuaded it ought not to be reckoned so.&#160; But where the difference is not a mere copyist&#8217;s error, and where the sense is agreeable to truth and illustrative of truth, we must believe that the divine Spirit prompted them to give a varying version, not in their function of translators, but in the liberty of prophesying.&#160; And therefore we find that the apostles justly sanction the Septuagint, by quoting it as well as the Hebrew when they adduce proofs from the Scriptures.&#160; But as I have promised to treat this subject more carefully, if God help me, in a more fitting place, I will now go on with the matter in hand.&#160; For there can be no doubt that, the lives of men being so long, the first-born of the first man could have built a city,—a city, however, which was earthly, and not that which is called the city of God, to describe which we have taken in hand this great work.