Ussher's Erroneous Interpretation of Genesis

You are here

Ussher's Erroneous Interpretation of Genesis

Login or Create an Account

With a UCG.org account you will be able to save items to read and study later!

Sign In | Sign Up

×

One of several controversies that broke out between the scientific community and the Roman church concerned the age of the earth. The church had taught through the centuries that the earth was only a few thousand years old. The Reformers also shared that view. An English bishop, James Ussher (1581-1656), announced that he had pinpointed the creation of Adam as not only in 4004 B.C., but, to be more precise, at 8 o'clock on Saturday morning, Oct. 22.

None of this, of course, was spelled out in the Scriptures. To regard the creation of the earth and Adam to be at virtually the same time is erroneous, as we shall see in a future installment.

Consequently, it came as a great surprise in the 19th century when the emerging science of geology began to discover and analyze many deep, fossil-laden strata. In 1799 William Smith, known as the father of English geology, established what was called the geologic column. Two centuries of subsequent geologic work all over the globe have largely vindicated his basic conclusions.

Even today geologists, having drilled as far as seven miles into the earth's crust, can find oil by comparing the rock layers to this geologic column. The same basic pattern has been confirmed by thousands of geologic and oil explorations. The essentials of this geologic column were established before Charles Darwin came onto the scene.

The earliest geologists, many of whom were studious Christians, believed that an ancient earth did not contradict the biblical account. After all, they had seen that the Bible did not give a date for the original creation. Genesis 1 could be seen as an original creation, and later, after an indeterminate period, came the formation in seven days of the present human, animal and plant life as we know it. Up to that time in the Western world, no one had questioned the biblical account of the creation of living things. Evolution was not generally accepted.

You might also be interested in...

When a fish believed to be extinct for 65 million years was found in the Indian...

Comments

  • Malachi 3_16-18
    Hi craigm, I don’t see anything on ucg.org about Mr.Green’s response to Ussher’s dating. But I believe if God had meant us to know the exact year He created man, He would have revealed it. If we knew the date, some would be even more obsessed with trying to calculate the exact date of Jesus’ 2nd Coming. Theoretically, this could be calculated if we knew man’s exact creation date, and assumed that 6 days of man’s work, followed by Sabbath, represented 6000 yrs of man’s rule on earth before Christ returns to set up His 1000 yr millennial rule and beyond (based on the likelihood of 1 day representing 1000 yrs – Ps 90:4). But Jesus, when asked the date of His return, replied that only His Father knew (Mt 24:36). If we knew the date of the 2nd Coming, we would let down spiritually until the very event itself, when it would be too late to reform (Mt 24:42-51). The chronologies certainly serve other purposes: e.g, to show how nations formed, and to emphasize the fact that God keeps His Word (for instance, with the lineage of King David and of Jesus Christ). Genealogies can be fascinating, but should be kept in the right perspective (1 Tim 1:4, Titus 3:9).
  • craigm
    I would appreciate hearing UCG's analysis of William Henry Green's response to the Ussher chronology, namely, that the Biblical genealogies have gaps so cannot be used to date humanity to approximately 6,000 years.
  • Join the conversation!

    Log in or register to post comments