When Methuselah was 167 years old, he fathered Lamech, and Lamech, at 188 years, fathered Noah. Therefore, Methuselah was 355 years old when Noah was born. The flood occurred in the six hundredth year of Noah's life, and through careful calculation, it is determined that the flood took place in the 955th year of Methuselah's life. Given that he is said to have lived over nine hundred sixty-nine years, it is evident that he survived fourteen years after the flood. However, how can this be true when only eight souls were saved upon the ark?"
This serves as the introduction, and here lies the key. "Hence, it must be presumed that most of the manuscripts in this instance contain an error in numeration, for the Hebrew and Samaritan texts state, 'And Methuselah lived 187 years and begat Lamech; and Methuselah lived after he begat Lamech 782 years and begat sons and daughters; and all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty-nine years, and he died; and Lamech lived 182 years and begat Noah.'" From the time of Methuselah's birth to Noah's birth spanned 369 years; if we add the six hundred years of Noah, since the flood occurred in his six hundredth year, it results in Methuselah dying in his nine hundred sixty-ninth year, the year in which the flood began.
To aid your faith in this understanding, refer to the translation by this most holy man, and you will find no doubt. For even the blessed Augustine, in the fifteenth book of "On the City of God," when discussing the discord between the Hebrew texts and their translation in the Septuagint, concludes his discourse by affirming that the total years of Methuselah's life are counted as nine hundred sixty-nine. Furthermore, "If we deduct nine hundred fifty-five years, from Methuselah's birth to the flood, it leaves fourteen years that he lived after the flood. Some suppose he may have lived elsewhere, not on the earth where all creatures perished, where life in water is not feasible, but rather with his father, who was carried to a different place and remained there until the flood’s conclusion. This viewpoint is held because they wish to maintain trust in the manuscripts—specifically the Septuagint to which the Church grants utmost reverence—and prefer to believe there's a discrepancy in the Hebrew texts as opposed to an error in the translations. They are reluctant to accept the likelihood that the translators made an error, rather than there being a falsehood in the original language from which the Greek translation emerged."
He continues: "Each person is free to embrace this view or notion as they will; one fact is certain: Methuselah did not survive the flood, but passed away on the brink of it." After offering some reasoning recognized for its insight, he remarks: "It seems more plausible to suggest that in the initial copies, as they began to transcribe from Ptolemy, an error may have been made in one manuscript and subsequently proliferated. Such an error could account for the discrepancies in Methuselah's lifespan."
Later, he states: "Thus, the difference in the figures presented in the Greek and Latin manuscripts compared to the Hebrew texts must be assigned to the error of the scribe who first copied the codex from the library of the aforementioned king. Regardless of one's perspective on this explanation, be it acceptance or denial, and whether the situation unfolded in this manner or another, I have no doubts that where discrepancies exist between the two manuscripts, and where the testimonies of both cannot be historically substantiated, the original language from which the translations were derived should be trusted more. For even among the three Greek, one Latin, and one Syriac manuscripts that agree with one another, it is apparent that Methuselah passed away six years prior to the flood." This is what both the Blessed Augustine and St. Jerome mention in the passages we have discussed. We need not reckon otherwise than what these learned men asserted.
In our time, Eucerius, a man of remarkable wisdom and notable understanding, expressed the issue eloquently: "How is it that the years of Methuselah count fourteen years post-flood, when only eight souls are cited as being in the ark?" The answer is: "Surely there is a miscalculation present in the Hebrew texts, leading to the count of fourteen years prior to the flood." These three witnesses are sufficiently persuasive for our stance, as it is written, "According to the words of two or three witnesses, every matter must be established." Many have elaborated on this topic. In addition, Isidore, the Bishop of Seville, renowned for his knowledge, offered this insight in his book of Etymologies: "Methuselah is interpreted as mortuus est (he died). The etymology of his name is evident. However, some believe he was taken away with his father and thus escaped the flood. Accordingly, it seems that it is translated mortuus est (he died) to indicate that he did not survive the flood but perished due to the deluge. Ultimately, only eight people on the ark were spared from it.
THEOSIS