The Templar Order must use the Conventional Timeline of the classical historical record for academic research restoring Templar ancient heritage. There are very few ancient dates relevant to Templar heritage, within a relatively short timeframe, which is sufficiently compatible with multiple Biblical chronologies.
Templars are Defenders of Religion, but the Order itself is not a religion, and does not teach nor require its members to hold any particular beliefs. Rather, it must focus on humanitarian missions of Chivalry. Thus, its only position on chronologies must be to promote unity for joining forces in Chivalry.
Necessarily, the restored Ancient Order of Knights of the Temple, carrying the founding ancient heritage of the original medieval Templar Order, must academically prove the facts of that heritage, using the Conventional Timeline of the historical record as the international standard.
Preserving its traditional role as Guardians of All Faith, and especially as Defenders of the Church, the Order must ensure that its use of the Conventional Timeline also respects the Biblical beliefs of many of its most dedicated Christian members.
Segment of Membership – Surveys establish that internationally, at least 40% of the general population strongly believe in Biblical chronology, by calculations of literal interpretations of Bible scriptures. Thus, an estimated segment of up to 40% of Templar members may believe in it.
Sprial Clock based on Escher ‘Droste’ painting (Unknown Artist)
Balance in Templarism – The most popularized Biblical timeline, dating world history from the creation of Adam and Eve, is as short as ca. 4,000 BC. However, other credible calculations of that same theory, by multiple prominent Bible scholars, range from ca. 11,000 BC to 20,000 BC.
Research for the Templar Restoration makes reference to only a select few of the most ancient dates relevant to Templar heritage, from the classical historical record, none of which are older than ca. 14,000 BC.
The few Templar heritage dates from academia present a relatively short timeframe, sufficiently compatible with multiple Biblical chronologies. This also does not require any belief in scientific claims of hundreds of thousands, nor millions and billions of years.
Accordingly, the Templar Order does not assert nor reject any particular chronology, neither religious nor scientific.
Main Focus on Chivalry – While Templars are Defenders of Religion, the Order itself is not a religion. Thus, it does not teach nor require its members to hold any particular beliefs. Rather, it teaches Chivalry, as an institution supporting missions of Chivalry.
Therefore, the only official position of the Templar Order regarding chronologies, must be to suggest some general bases for potential flexibility and compatibility, and focus on the Conventional Timeline of academia as a neutral compromise, all to promote unity for joining forces in Chivalry.
For the purposes of Restoration of Templar heritage, the Templar Order must use the Conventional Timeline of mainstream university academia, which is necessary to be compatible with international standards, enabling new research breakthroughs for further restoration of its ancient heritage.
Scriptures of the Bible are considered by all Christians to be the “Word of God”, as the Apostles of Jesus taught that “all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine” (II Timothy 3:16).
By the doctrine that “God is Truth” (Psalm 25:5), and the “sum of [God’s] word is Truth” (Psalm 119:160), from “God, who never lies” (Titus 1:2), most Christians believe that the text of the Bible is completely accurate, and thus if understood correctly, can never be wrong.
Based upon this concept, some very dedicated Christian scholars have applied strict literal interpretation of the creation accounts in the Books of Genesis, to reconstruct Biblical chronologies of the timeline of world history since God’s Creation of the world.
“Young Earth Creationism” is a theory for the timeline of world history, based upon calculations from strict literal interpretations of the Biblical Book of Genesis, to establish dating of the year of Creation from the time of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.
The most popular versions of Young Earth calculations have very short timelines, which contradict the estimates of longer dates from all classical and modern academia and science.
However, multiple versions of the same theory prove a longer Biblical timeline, which is sufficiently compatible with the Conventional Timeline established by the classical historical record and confirmed by archaeology.
An estimated 80% of Protestants, and 40% of Catholics, believe in Young Earth Creation chronology. Assuming that among Templar Christians half are Protestant and half are Catholic, an average of 60% of those believe in it.
Accordingly, assuming that 66% (two-thirds) of the general membership of the Templar Order are Christians, an estimated segment of up to 40% of all Templar members may potentially believe in it.
Therefore, this theory, and its various calculations of timeframes, is a prominent theological and cultural matter, which cannot be offhandedly dismissed, and must be addressed by the Templar Order.
A balanced Templar policy on this issue is necessary to promote mutual understanding among membership, to provide cultural unity in pursuing the priority Templar missions of Chivalry.
The shorter timeline was first developed in detail by the 17th century Irish Protestant Bishop James Ussher, head of the Anglo-Irish Church, in 1650 AD. This widely known calculation is thus known as the “Ussher Chronology”.
The Ussher Chronology was first popularized by the Church of England adopting it in 1701 AD, including it in publications of its official Protestant Bible, the Authorized King James Version (AKJV), for household use internationally.
It was further popularized by the Gideons, including it in free Gideon Bibles distributed in hotel rooms and military bases worldwide since ca. 1970.
Accordingly, Young Earth chronologies remain a strong belief among Protestants throughout the United States, the British Commonwealth countries, and much of Europe. It is especially popular among Anglicans and Episcopalians, Lutherans and Calvinists, other Evangelicals such as Baptists, Presbyterians and Adventists, and also Amish Mennonites.
A Gallup Poll survey in 2019 found that 40% of adults in the United States believe in the Young Earth theory [1] ((Megan Brenan, 40% of Americans Believe in Creationism, Gallup, Washington DC (26 July 2019): Gallup Poll finding that 40% of US adults believe that “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so”.)).
A Gallup Poll survey in 1991 found that even 5% of scientists with professional science degrees believe in Young Earth Creationism, and that 40% of scientists believe that even the process of evolution (contrary to creationism) is guided by God ((Larry Witham, Many Scientists See God’s Hand in Evolution, Journal “Reports of the National Center for Science Education”, Oakland California, Volume 17 Issue 6 (1997); Citing results of a 1991 Gallup Poll. )) [2].
In classical Catholicism, the Code of Canon Law establishes that the “authentic magisterium [teaching authority]” of the Church is limited only to “matter[s] of Faith or morals” (Canon 752) ((The Vatican, The Code of Canon Law: Apostolic Constitution, Second Ecumenical Council (“Vatican II”), Enacted (1965), Amended and ratified by Pope John Paul II, Holy See of Rome (1983), Canon 752; “Glossary” (end): defines “magisterium” as “teaching authority of the Church”.)) [3]. This categorically excludes the Church imposing any required beliefs about “matters of science”.
Biblical scripture teaches that an ordered universe of nature was created by God through intelligent design. As a result, “The heavens declare the glory of God”, and creation “showeth his handywork” and “sheweth knowledge” revealing and confirming this intelligent design (Psalm 19:1-4).
Therefore, in Catholicism, science and religion are considered to be wholly compatible, and exploring science only serves to reveal the glory of God.
This is the official position of the Catholic Church, which leaves beliefs in creationism and evolution – and related timelines – open to individual choice. This policy is also based upon the 5th century doctrine of Saint Augustine:
In 415 AD, Augustine declared that Young Earth Creationism should not be a required doctrine of Faith, and that it should not be promoted or debated:
“It is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel [non-believer] to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture [literally], talking nonsense on these [scientific] topics; And we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up [point to] vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn [contempt].” ((Saint Augustine, On the Literal Meaning of Genesis (415 AD); Published in: Quasten, Burghardt & Lawler, Ancient Christian Writers, The Newman Press, New York, Paulist Press, New Jersey (1982), Volume II: John Hammond Taylor, S.J. (Translator), “St. Augustine: The Literal Meaning of Genesis”.)) [4]
In 426 AD, Augustine nonetheless admitted that he personally believed in it, which is consistent with the policy that it is a matter of individual choice:
“[W]e can calculate from Sacred Scripture that [in 426 AD] not 6,000 years have passed since the creation of man [ca. 5,500 BC]. … If it offends them [scientists] that the time that has elapsed since the Creation of man is so short… let them take this into consideration, that nothing that has a limit is long… when compared to the interminable eternity.” ((Saint Augustine, The City of God (426 AD), Book 12, Chapter 11; Translation in G. G. Walsh & G. Monahan, The City of God, Catholic University of America Press, Washington DC (1952), p.263.)) [5]
Following Saint Augustine, modern Catholic scholars maintain that: “[It is] important to teach [the Faithful] that they need not worry that their Faith is somehow opposed to science just because some Christians… [and most] of the popular media, assume such an opposition.” ((Brett Salkeld, Catholic Creationism as a Conspiracy Theory, “Church Life Journal”, McGrath Institute for Church Life, University of Notre Dame (13 May 2020); Salkeld is an official Theologian for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Regina in Canada.))
[6]
The modern mainstream media does promote relentless propaganda of science supposedly discrediting religion. Because the ‘boomerang effect’ of propaganda leads most people to believe that what is criticized must be true, and also because Catholicism allows individual freedom of belief on these matters, a large number of Catholics believe in Young Earth chronology.
Mirroring the surveys that 40% of all Americans believe in Young Earth chronology, an estimated 40% of Catholics also believe in the same Biblical timelines as the majority of Protestants.
‘Persistence of Memory’ Salvador Dali (1931)
The most popular Young Earth chronologies, which are all related to or close variations of the 17th century Ussher Chronology, provide calculations dating the creation of Adam and Eve ranging from ca. 4,000 BC to ca. 6,000 BC.
However, other calculations of the same Young Earth theory establish dating of the Genesis creation ranging from ca. 11,000 BC to as early as ca. 20,000 BC:
The 20th century American Calvinist evangelist and civil engineer Harold Camping (1921-2013) calculated Biblical dating to 11,013 BC, known as the “Camping Chronology” ((Harold Egbert Camping, The Biblical Calendar of History (1970): “Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation” (JASA), Volume 22 (September 1970); Reprint: Family Stations, Oakland California (1985); Expanded as 2nd Edition: Adam When?: A Biblical Solution to the Timetable of Mankind (1974); Calculating dating to 11,013 BC.)) [7]. This was confirmed by calculations of many other Bible scholars, and recognized in a Christian encyclopedia ((Norman L. Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Books, Grand Rapids Michigan (1999), p.267, p.272; Explaining reported “gaps” in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11, allowing Biblical literal interpretation to place creation dating at ca. 11,000 BC.)) [8].
The late 19th century American Baptist missionary Reverend Tarleton Perry Crawford (1821-1902) similarly calculated Biblical dating to 12,500 BC, known as the “Crawford Chronology”.
The early 19th century German diplomat and Bible scholar Christian Charles Josias, the Baron von Bunsen (1791-1860), calculated the earliest Biblical dating to ca. 20,000 BC, known as the “Baron Bunsen Chronology”. ((Reverend Tarleton Perry Crawford, The Patriarchal Dynasties from Adam to Abraham, Josiah Ryland Press, Richmond Virginia (1877), Appendix: “A Chronological Table by Different Authors”, p.164; Calculating “Dynastic” dating to 12,500 BC; Citing Baron Christian Bunsen dating to 20,000 BC.)) ((Alexander Winchell, LL.D., Pre-Adamites: The Existence of Men Before Adam (1880), 4th Edition, S.C. Griggs, Chicago (1888), Chapter 8 “A Glance at Hebrew Chronology”, Section “Epoch of Creation According to Various Authorities”, Part 3 “Christian Authorities”, p.100; Citing Rev. Tarleton Crawford dating to 12,500 BC and the Baron Christian Charles von Bunsen dating to 20,000 BC.)) [9] [10]
It should be considered that many devout Bible scholars, who all dedicated lifetime careers to establishing Biblical chronologies, each came to different conclusions varying by thousands of years. Thus, surely the Templar Order cannot be expected to resolve the matter, nor attempt to prove or declare that any one timeline is more correct than the others.
The Biblical chronologies of Camping, Crawford, and Baron Bunsen, all accurately quote and carefully analyze a wider range of Bible scriptures, which allow a degree of flexibility to expand the Biblical timeline. Such additional scriptures tend to prove that the Bible is not necessarily incompatible with nor contradictory to the Conventional Timeline of academia.
Indeed, if the Bible must be understood by strict literal interpretation, then one must also consider additional clarifying Bible passages equally as literally.
While the diverse Faithful insisting upon competing interpretations of Bible scriptures may never agree on conclusions, the fact is, at least, that the scriptural bases for expanding the timeframe cannot be dismissed as ‘un-Biblical’.
In any case, the additional Bible scriptures expanding the Biblical chronologies, making them more compatible with the classical historical record supported by archaeology, only serve to greatly strengthen the Faith.
The Templar Order can only recognize the underlying and unifying fact, that all of the Biblical chronologies are simply different interpretations confirming the same basic Biblical Truth, that God created Adam and Eve relatively recently, only a few thousand years ago.
The Templar Order also recognizes that the Conventional Timeline, from the classical historical record supported by archaeology, also has a very short timeframe, which is reasonably compatible with the Biblical chronologies. Thus, with the Templar use of academic dates, there is also no need for any hundreds of thousands nor millions and billions of years in the timeline.
Despite classical science and the scientific method traditionally being dedicated to the objective search for empirical facts, the modern public perception of what science knows is actually driven by politicians and the mainstream media.
The resulting propaganda, always advancing some ideological agenda, glorifies a false claimed “science”, represented by political activists as supposed “experts”, to impose a presumed “authority”, to politically suppress all dissent from real and honest scientists.
‘Jester of Shifting Time’ by Unknown Artist (2005)
However, genuine scientists admit and explain that the propaganda claims of “settled science” are in fact merely “theories”, artificially constructed from mere philosophies, with minimal reference to empirical science.
Merely assuming that matters are the subject of science, thereby characterizing them as “scientific”, does not mean that any actual science supports those claims.
The competing Biblical chronologies involve conflicting interpretations of Bible scriptures, which apparently can never be resolved.
In much the same way, the modern scientific theories justifying an extremely long but unspecified secular chronology also have many contradictions, which are equally unresolved.
The Templar Order can only view the scientific theories in the context of one overarching fact – the proverbial “elephant in the room” – that all of modern society, during about 250 years of our recent history, has been built on many layers and levels of lies upon lies, affecting all areas of civilization.
For this reason, even basic facts of events in world history cannot be discussed at all, without first clearing away 250 years of deception just to allow the actual facts to be seen. For precisely that same reason, certainly the claims of modern science require exactly the same treatment.
From this healthy perspective, it seems that any ancient sources at all should have much more credibility than any modern sources – and “the older the better”.
Most of the confidence of institutional academia – and credibility among the general public – for modern scientific dating methods, relies upon assumed authority and implied certainty from the mere existence of “carbon dating” technology, even when it is not used.
Carbon dating has supposedly dated some artifacts at tens of thousands of years old, which is sometimes used in analytical interpretations seeming to justify timelines spanning hundreds of thousands of years, if not millions and billions.
However, university geologists and other scientists reluctantly admit several facts proving that carbon dating has major limitations.
University scientists admit that carbon dating actually cannot date anything more than 20,000 years old:
“Radiocarbon dating doesn’t work well on objects much older than twenty thousand years, because such objects have so little C-14 [carbon] left” ((Christopher Gregory Weber, Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating, “Creation Evolution Journal”, National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Volume 3, Number 2 (Spring 1982).))
[11].
“It is not generally practicable to measure ages in excess of about twenty thousand years, because the radioactivity of the carbon becomes so slight that it is difficult to get an accurate measurement” ((Prof. Patrick M. Hurley, How Old is the Earth?, 1st Edition, Anchor Books (1959), 2nd Edition, Greenwood Press (1979), p.108; Dr. Hurley was a Professor of the Geology and Geophysics Department of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).))
[12].
Therefore, the most empirical scientific technology cannot really prove that anything is older than 18,000 BC. This allows scientific understanding to fully accommodate the 20,000 BC timeframe of the Baron Bunsen Chronology.
University scientists also admit that carbon dating is subject to factors of many circumstances, which can cause the resulting carbon dates to be at least double the true historical dates of the sampled artifacts:
Carbon dating only works on once-living organic samples which still contain carbon, like plant matter, wood, bone or flesh, and thus cannot date rocks or fossils which are inorganic.
However, “[scientists] radiocarbon-dated the shell of a living freshwater mussel and obtained an age of over two thousand years”, revealing great unreliability.
The scientific reason given to justify and excuse that seashell result, actually reveals another major flaw in carbon dating:
When the source samples “have not been mixed with fresh carbon from the air… the C-14 dating method makes [them] seem older than they really are” ((Christopher Gregory Weber, Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating, “Creation Evolution Journal”, National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Volume 3, Number 2 (Spring 1982).)) [13].
Artifacts from archaeology are almost always buried in sealed tombs, under sand, or underwater, typically for thousands of years. They are also often found in deep underground chambers with minimal air supply, or at high altitudes of rarified air. Thus, the vast majority of artifacts are generally substantially deprived of most airborne carbon absorption.
An artifact in an air-sealed area or thin-air environment has at most only half of the carbon absorption available in normal open-air locations. As a result, if an artifact in such situation is carbon dated to 20,000 years old, it is probably not more than 10,000 years old, if not much more recent.
Therefore, circumstances can make true dates only about half of the limitation of carbon dating results, thus further limiting carbon to not dating most artifacts older than 8,000 BC.
This allows science to fully accommodate the shorter 11,013 BC timeframe of the Camping Chronology and 12,500 BC timeframe of the Crawford Chronology, as well as the ca. 20,000 BC timeframe of the Baron Bunsen Chronology.
The elements of “Belief” and “Faith” are not only a part of religion, but are also a major component of modern science, both as the basis for its assumptions, and also as the basis for acceptance of its theories.
In many ways, the claims attributed to modern science have essentially become a “secular religion”, increasingly called “Scientism”. Like the classical religions, Scientism also demands adherence to its “dogmas” of scientific theories, and opposition to all “heresies” challenging those theories.
Many of the modern scientific claims are actually based on abstract philosophy, just as much as traditional religious beliefs are based on spiritual theology.
Especially for timelines of world origins and world history, the scientific theories are really based upon constructs of philosophy, and not empirical facts.
The dating of hundreds of thousands, millions and billions of years, is actually circular reasoning:
Scientists began with the assumption that the theory of evolution “must be” true, and then used models to demonstrate how so many years “must have been” necessary for evolution to be possible. All dating of geology and fossils was then driven and justified by those theoretical models.
Many prominent scientists admit, and also explain, how modern science is mostly a secular religion of its own dogmatic beliefs, developed from its own philosophies, which are just as subjective as any religion.
Two prominent physicists, one with qualifications in psychiatry, jointly wrote:
“The concept of the ‘scientific method’ is often strongly associated with the ideal that the foundation of science is absolute truth… of explanations of objective reality… as opposed to our beliefs… This vision of science provides a secular belief system”.
“In fact, science operates on the basis of plenty of subjective and belief-based inferences. … Accordingly, the concept of a ‘scientific truth’ is regarded as ‘man-made’ descriptions of the world, in the form of models and theories with their own scopes and limitations”.
“[Such] ‘scientific truth’ is [thus based on] man-made assumptions… emotions and other psychological factors… leading to instances of misconceptions [and] errors… sometimes even at a mass level and persisting for long times.” ((Csaba Szantay Jr. & Ewald Moser, Self-Managed Belief as Part of the ‘Scientific Method’: A Guide on Mental Modus Operandi”, Journal “Frontiers in Physics”, Volume 6, Number 68, Section “Medical Physics and Imaging” (03 July 2018); Szantay is from Budapest University of Technology and Economics; Moser is from Center for Medical Physics at Medical University of Vienna, and Department of Psychiatry at University of Pennsylvania.)) [14]
Another Professor of Physics for several American universities explained:
“You’ve heard of our greatest scientific theories: the theory of Evolution, the Big Bang theory… You’ve also heard of the concept of a proof, and the claims that certain pieces of evidence prove the validities of these theories. … Except that’s a complete lie… they aren’t proof.”
“In science… You never know when your assumptions will suddenly become invalid. … It’s a leap of faith… and while these are often good leaps of faith, you cannot prove that these leaps are always valid.”
“[Science can] ‘prove’ something that turns out not to be true. … [So] nothing in science can ever truly be proven. It’s always subject to revision.” ((Prof. Ethan Siegel, Ph.D., Scientific Proof is a Myth, Forbes Magazine (November 2017); Siegel is a Professor of Astrophysics at several American universities.)) [15]
As the famous theoretical physicist Albert Einstein wrote in 1922:
“The scientific theorist is not to be envied. For Nature… [is] not a very friendly judge of his work. It never says ‘Yes’ to a theory. In the most favorable cases it says ‘Maybe’, and in the great majority of cases simply ‘No’. … Probably every theory will some day experience its ‘No’.” ((Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Albert Einstein: The Human Side: New Glimpses from His Archives, Princeton University Press, New Jersey (1979), p.18: Quoting Albert Einstein “Note dated 11 November 1922”.))
[16]
As Shakespeare wrote as a featured line in his play Hamlet in 1600 AD:
“There are more things in Heaven and Earth… than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” ((William Shakespeare, Play: Hamlet (1600 AD), Act 1, Scene 5: Hamlet speaking to his friend Horatio.)) [17]
Respecting an essential balance of beliefs with an effective understanding of the historical record, the Templar Order does not assert nor reject any particular chronology, neither religious nor scientific.
Regardless of various beliefs, the Templar Order certainly could not presume nor endeavour to recalculate and rewrite all dating throughout millennia of the classical historical record, centuries of academic encyclopedias, and over a century of modern archaeology, worldwide.
Therefore, the Templar Order must use the Conventional Timeline of mainstream university academia, which is necessary to be compatible with international standards, enabling new research breakthroughs for further restoration of its ancient heritage.
While Templars are Defenders of Religion, the Order itself is not a religion. Thus, it does not teach nor require its members to hold any particular beliefs. Rather, it teaches Chivalry, as an institution supporting missions of Chivalry.
The defining and unifying higher purpose of the Templar Order is to embody the living tradition of Chivalry as a practical way of life in the modern era, primarily by focusing on its humanitarian missions.
Accordingly, the only purpose of Templars using any historical dates, is as mere reference points which help to rediscover related areas of lost history, all for restoration of the ancient heritage of the Order, all for supporting Chivalry.
The only scholarly evidence of the earliest periods of ancient antiquity is contained in the historical record from classical historians. This body of history provides very few dates, and fewer details explaining those dates.
As the Ancient Egyptian Priest said to Solon the Law Giver of Athens ca. 600 BC: “You have no antiquity of history, and no history of antiquity” ((Ignatius Donnelly, Atlantis: The Antediluvian World, Harper & Brothers, New York (1882), p.6; Ignatius Donnelly (1831-1901) was a lawyer specializing in evidence proving historical facts.)) [18].
The classical historical record seems more neutral and objective, because most of it developed at least 500 years before Christianity, and over 2,000 years before modern science, thus free from any of their competing beliefs. Its details of events, and its few dates, are also confirmed by modern archaeology.
From this academic timeline, only a select few of the most ancient dates are relevant to Templar heritage.
Flexibility Acceptable – From the perspective of the Order, if the few relevant dates might be much earlier or much later by alternate chronologies, it would be of no consequence to Templarism and Chivalry. The only significance of such dates is their sequential order, and as reference points to rediscover more details from the historical record.
No Need for Millions – The few dates of Templar ancient heritage are all on a relatively short timeline, which is reasonably compatible with most of the Biblical Chronologies. Thus, Templar history has no need for any hundreds of thousands, nor millions and billions of years, such that scientific chronology is irrelevant.
The following are very brief summaries of the select few dates which are considered relevant to the ancient heritage of the Templar Order:
The Egyptian historian Manetho, in his Dynasties Stela stone tablet (ca. 220 BC), documented the beginning of Egypt from the beginning of the civilization of Atlantis, dated ca. 14,120 BC. The Greek historian Plato, in his Critias Manuscript (ca. 400 BC), confirmed this, dating the international Royal Alliance established by the Ten Kings of Atlantis to ca. 14,000 BC.
The Greek historian Solon the Law Giver of Athens (ca. 600 BC), in manuscripts completed by Plato in his Timaeus Manuscript (ca. 400 BC), combined with details from the Greek historian Herodotus in his Histories: Europe (ca. 450 BC), established that Egypt became a Colony of Atlantis ca. 11,800 BC.
Ancient Persian Tablets and Zoroastrian Scriptures in cuneiform, documented the quasi-mythical King Jamshid establishing the Magi ‘Nart’ Knights as Guardians of a ‘Nartmongue’ Holy Grail, dated by the Zoroastrian King List and classical scholars to ca. 10,068 BC.
The manuscripts of Solon the Law Giver (ca. 600 BC), reported by Plato in his Timaeus Manuscript (ca. 400 BC), documented that the Ancient Egyptian Priests dated the destruction of Atlantis by the Great Flood to ca. 9,600 BC.
Ancient Persian Tablets and Zoroastrian Scriptures in cuneiform, documented King Kai Khosrow reestablishing and leading the Magi ‘Nart’ Knights of a ‘Round Table’ with a ‘Nartmongue’ Holy Grail, as a Royal Order of Chivalry, dated by the Zoroastrian King List and classical scholars to ca. 7,477 BC.
(See Short Proofs of Rare Ancient Dates in Templar Archaeology)
By the Conventional Timeline, Adam and Eve can only be dated by Biblical years of the Ten Patriarchs (Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah and Shem), which add up to a period of 1,560 years before their tribes could establish the Ten Kings of Atlantis ca. 14,000 BC.
Accordingly, the Conventional Timeline dates Adam and Eve to ca. 15,560 BC, the Ten Kings of Atlantis descendant from the Adamic Patriarchs to ca. 14,000 BC, and the Great Flood to ca. 9,600 BC.
The Ussher Chronology dates Adam and Eve to 4,004 BC and the “Deluge” Great Flood of Noah’s Ark to 2,348 BC ((Alexander Winchell, LL.D., Pre-Adamites: The Existence of Men Before Adam (1880), 4th Edition, S.C. Griggs, Chicago (1888), Chapter 8 “A Glance at Hebrew Chronology”, Section “Epoch of Creation According to Various Authorities”, Part 3 “Christian Authorities”, pp.100-102; Citing “Ussher and popular opinion” dating Adam and Eve to 4,004 BC and “The Deluge” (Great Flood) to 2,348 BC.)) [19]. By this, the Conventional Timeline of Adam and Eve and the Great Flood would both need to be reduced by about 75% shorter. This would require translating all academic dates to about 75% shorter, causing serious conflict with the archaeology of relatively recent events.
The Camping Chronology dates Adam and Eve to 11,013 BC, and the Great Flood to 4,990 BC ((Harold Egbert Camping, The Biblical Calendar of History (1970): “Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation” (JASA), Volume 22 (September 1970); Reprint: Family Stations, Oakland California (1985), “A Calendar of Events in Biblical History”, p.12; Calculating dating Adam and Eve to 11,013 BC and the Great Flood to 4,990 BC.)) [20]. By this, the Conventional Timeline of Adam and Eve would be reduced by about 30% shorter, and the Great Flood by 48% shorter. This would require translating all academic dates to an average of about 40% shorter.
The Crawford Chronology dates Adam and Eve to 12,500 BC, and the Great Flood to 4,753 BC ((Alexander Winchell, LL.D., Pre-Adamites: The Existence of Men Before Adam (1880), 4th Edition, S.C. Griggs, Chicago (1888), “Epoch of Creation According to Various Authorities”, Part 3 “Christian Authorities”, pp.100-102; Citing Rev. Tarleton Crawford dating Adam and Eve to 12,500 BC and the Great Flood to 4,763 BC.)) [21]. By this, the Conventional Timeline of Adam and Eve would be reduced by about 20% shorter, and the Great Flood by 50% shorter. This would require translating all academic dates to an average of 35% shorter.
The Baron Bunsen Chronology dates Adam and Eve to ca. 20,000 BC, and the Great Flood to ca. 10,000 BC ((Alexander Winchell, LL.D., Pre-Adamites: The Existence of Men Before Adam (1880), 4th Edition, S.C. Griggs, Chicago (1888), “Epoch of Creation According to Various Authorities”, Part 3 “Christian Authorities”, pp.100-102; Citing the Baron Christian Charles von Bunsen dating Adam and Eve to ca. 20,000 BC and the Great Flood to ca. 10,000 BC.)) [22]. By this, the Conventional Timeline of Adam and Eve would be expanded to about 27% longer, and the Great Flood to only 4% longer. This would require translating academic dates to an average of only 15% longer, and would bring all archaeology dates after 9,000 BC into full alignment ‘on par’ without any adjustment.
On the basis of all of the above facts and analysis, the restored Templar Order cannot ignore the practical reality of the resulting necessary conclusions:
The historical institution of the Knights Templar is an Order of Chivalry, which must first and foremost concentrate on teaching Chivalry, and advancing the humanitarian missions of Chivalry.
For Templar heritage, the few relevant ancient dates do not require any beliefs, neither religious nor scientific, in any of the competing theories of chronology.
The only purpose of these dates is not to confirm nor deny any beliefs of religion nor science. Rather, they are mere reference points, as keys to unlock deeper understanding from the historical record, to further rediscover the traditions of Chivalry.
The primary significance and utility of these dates is not their timeframe, but rather their sequence, revealing which earlier events may have influenced later events, to provide a context for historical analysis.
Therefore, the only official position of the Templar Order regarding chronologies, must be to focus on the Conventional Timeline as a neutral compromise with the most compatibility, all to promote unity for joining forces in Chivalry.
The different calculations of Biblical chronologies all have relatively short timelines, with the creation date ranging from only about 4,000 BC to no more than 20,000 BC, compared to modern scientific theories ranging from hundreds of thousands to even millions and billions of years.
This presents an important social problem for both religion and science:
Problem for Religion – For religion, the venerated Word of God cannot be deemed mistaken, causing many of the Faithful to reject modern scientific theories. This makes religion seem ‘anti-science’, subjecting it to public ridicule and disrepute.
That problem for religion would be solved by consideration of the multiple Biblical chronologies, which could expand its timeframe to accept most of the relevant historical periods of the Conventional Timeline.
Problem for Science – For science, its revered technology cannot be deemed mistaken, causing many scientists and the public to reject religious Faith. This makes science seem ‘anti-religion’, implying political motives undermining its credibility.
That problem for science would be solved by a more critical understanding of the limitations of scientific claims, which would narrow its timeframe to accept the possibility of a traditional Biblical chronology.
Solution of History – The best solution – providing a balancing compromise – is to rely upon the Conventional Timeline from the classical historical record, which is supported by archaeology.
Dating by the Conventional Timeline of academia as the international standard, at least as a reference, maintains a universal compatibility with the collective historical record of all world scholarship, and is ideologically neutral.
Templar Restoration – For the purposes of Restoration of Templar heritage, the Templar Order officially “mandates” that the Conventional Timeline of international academia must be “necessarily relied upon” for full compatibility with the classical historical record and archaeology, to ensure the reliability, effectiveness, and universal impact of its research.
Biblical Scholarship – For the purposes of Biblical Christian Faith, the Templar Order officially “recognizes” the Camping Chronology (11,013 BC) and Crawford Chronology (12,500 BC), as “sufficiently compatible”, and “endorses” the Baron Bunsen Chronology (20,000 BC) as “maximally compatible” with the Conventional Timeline used for Restoration of Templar heritage.
Members of the restored Templar Order have the right to freedom of choice in their preferred beliefs about historical chronologies. Logically, it seems that Christian members can choose any one or more of the following options:
Unifying Principles – One can recognize that the Conventional Timeline is fully compatible with the same unifying principles as the Biblical chronologies, that God created Adam and Eve only a few thousands of years ago, and that there is no need for any hundreds of thousands nor millions and billions of years in the timeline of relevant Templar ancient heritage.
Standard Reference – One can acknowledge the Conventional Timeline dates as standard reference points only for practical utility in academic research, and continue to believe in one’s preferred Biblical chronology version.
Translating Dates – One can interpret the Conventional Timeline dates by mentally translating them into reduced dates of a shorter Biblical chronology, to internally satisfy one’s own beliefs, as one would have to do in all other matters dealing with world history.
The above comparison section indicates that one can roughly translate the Conventional dates into one’s preferred shorter Biblical dates as follows:
For Ussher Chronology (4,004 BC), 75% shorter; For Camping Chronology (11,013 BC), 40% shorter; For Crawford Chronology (12,500 BC), 35% shorter; For Baron Bunsen Chronology (20,000 BC), 15% longer until ca. 9,000 BC.
See Short Proofs of Rare Ancient Dates in Templar Archaeology.
[1] Megan Brenan, 40% of Americans Believe in Creationism, Gallup, Washington DC (26 July 2019): Gallup Poll finding that 40% of US adults believe that “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so”.
[2] Larry Witham, Many Scientists See God’s Hand in Evolution, Journal “Reports of the National Center for Science Education”, Oakland California, Volume 17 Issue 6 (1997); Citing results of a 1991 Gallup Poll.
[3] The Vatican, The Code of Canon Law: Apostolic Constitution, Second Ecumenical Council (“Vatican II”), Enacted (1965), Amended and ratified by Pope John Paul II, Holy See of Rome (1983), Canon 752; “Glossary” (end): defines “magisterium” as “teaching authority of the Church”.
[4] Saint Augustine, On the Literal Meaning of Genesis (415 AD); Published in: Quasten, Burghardt & Lawler, Ancient Christian Writers, The Newman Press, New York, Paulist Press, New Jersey (1982), Volume II: John Hammond Taylor, S.J. (Translator), “St. Augustine: The Literal Meaning of Genesis”.
[5] Saint Augustine, The City of God (426 AD), Book 12, Chapter 11; Translation in G. G. Walsh & G. Monahan, The City of God, Catholic University of America Press, Washington DC (1952), p.263.
[6] Brett Salkeld, Catholic Creationism as a Conspiracy Theory, “Church Life Journal”, McGrath Institute for Church Life, University of Notre Dame (13 May 2020); Salkeld is an official Theologian for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Regina in Canada.
[7] Harold Egbert Camping, The Biblical Calendar of History (1970): “Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation” (JASA), Volume 22 (September 1970); Reprint: Family Stations, Oakland California (1985); Expanded as 2nd Edition: Adam When?: A Biblical Solution to the Timetable of Mankind (1974); Calculating dating to 11,013 BC.
[8] Norman L. Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Books, Grand Rapids Michigan (1999), p.267, p.272; Explaining reported “gaps” in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11, allowing Biblical literal interpretation to place creation dating at ca. 11,000 BC.
[9] Reverend Tarleton Perry Crawford, The Patriarchal Dynasties from Adam to Abraham, Josiah Ryland Press, Richmond Virginia (1877), Appendix: “A Chronological Table by Different Authors”, p.164; Calculating “Dynastic” dating to 12,500 BC; Citing Baron Christian Bunsen dating to 20,000 BC.
[10] Alexander Winchell, LL.D., Pre-Adamites: The Existence of Men Before Adam (1880), 4th Edition, S.C. Griggs, Chicago (1888), Chapter 8 “A Glance at Hebrew Chronology”, Section “Epoch of Creation According to Various Authorities”, Part 3 “Christian Authorities”, p.100; Citing Rev. Tarleton Crawford dating to 12,500 BC and the Baron Christian Charles von Bunsen dating to 20,000 BC.
[11] Christopher Gregory Weber, Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating, “Creation Evolution Journal”, National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Volume 3, Number 2 (Spring 1982).
[12] Prof. Patrick M. Hurley, How Old is the Earth?, 1st Edition, Anchor Books (1959), 2nd Edition, Greenwood Press (1979), p.108; Dr. Hurley was a Professor of the Geology and Geophysics Department of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
[13] Christopher Gregory Weber, Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating, “Creation Evolution Journal”, National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Volume 3, Number 2 (Spring 1982).
[14] Csaba Szantay Jr. & Ewald Moser, Self-Managed Belief as Part of the ‘Scientific Method’: A Guide on Mental Modus Operandi”, Journal “Frontiers in Physics”, Volume 6, Number 68, Section “Medical Physics and Imaging” (03 July 2018); Szantay is from Budapest University of Technology and Economics; Moser is from Center for Medical Physics at Medical University of Vienna, and Department of Psychiatry at University of Pennsylvania.
[15] Prof. Ethan Siegel, Ph.D., Scientific Proof is a Myth, Forbes Magazine (November 2017); Siegel is a Professor of Astrophysics at several American universities.
[16] Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Albert Einstein: The Human Side: New Glimpses from His Archives, Princeton University Press, New Jersey (1979), p.18: Quoting Albert Einstein “Note dated 11 November 1922”.
[17] William Shakespeare, Play: Hamlet (1600 AD), Act 1, Scene 5: Hamlet speaking to his friend Horatio.
[18] Ignatius Donnelly, Atlantis: The Antediluvian World, Harper & Brothers, New York (1882), p.6; Ignatius Donnelly (1831-1901) was a lawyer specializing in evidence proving historical facts.
[19] Alexander Winchell, LL.D., Pre-Adamites: The Existence of Men Before Adam (1880), 4th Edition, S.C. Griggs, Chicago (1888), Chapter 8 “A Glance at Hebrew Chronology”, Section “Epoch of Creation According to Various Authorities”, Part 3 “Christian Authorities”, pp.100-102; Citing “Ussher and popular opinion” dating Adam and Eve to 4,004 BC and “The Deluge” (Great Flood) to 2,348 BC.
[20] Harold Egbert Camping, The Biblical Calendar of History (1970): “Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation” (JASA), Volume 22 (September 1970); Reprint: Family Stations, Oakland California (1985), “A Calendar of Events in Biblical History”, p.12; Calculating dating Adam and Eve to 11,013 BC and the Great Flood to 4,990 BC.
[21] Alexander Winchell, LL.D., Pre-Adamites: The Existence of Men Before Adam (1880), 4th Edition, S.C. Griggs, Chicago (1888), “Epoch of Creation According to Various Authorities”, Part 3 “Christian Authorities”, pp.100-102; Citing Rev. Tarleton Crawford dating Adam and Eve to 12,500 BC and the Great Flood to 4,763 BC.
[22] Alexander Winchell, LL.D., Pre-Adamites: The Existence of Men Before Adam (1880), 4th Edition, S.C. Griggs, Chicago (1888), “Epoch of Creation According to Various Authorities”, Part 3 “Christian Authorities”, pp.100-102; Citing the Baron Christian Charles von Bunsen dating Adam and Eve to ca. 20,000 BC and the Great Flood to ca. 10,000 BC.
You cannot copy content of this page
