Do you believe the ages of people in early Genesis are accurate as we now have them?

Before the flood, it is clear that people experienced significantly longer lifespans.  Even after the flood (Abraham/Moses), lifespans still hit 120.

We know that in the LXX translation, the ages are sometimes significantly different (higher).

Some have concluded that the system for tracking a "year" was different than we now track it.  Others would say that, because these languages relied on words and letters (and not numbers),  copyist errors were inevitable. Others say that, in its original context and time, giving long lifespans would imply the importance of an individual, not his actual lifespan.

Everyone who participates in SI believes in inerrancy.  This means none of us challenge that  the original documents were correct both in how they were written and how these numbers would have been decoded at that time.

Do you have any thoughts on this?  Please comment.

I believe the Masoretic Text numbers have been preserved accurately and that the "years" are close to how we calculate.
57% (12 votes)
I believe the Masoretic Text is generally accurate and years are close to our years.
10% (2 votes)
I believe the LXX Text is generally accurate, and years are close to our years.
0% (0 votes)
I believe that the numbers are not consistently dependable and some may not reflect the lifespans of the original..
5% (1 vote)
I believe that the term "year" does not refer to our concept of year.
0% (0 votes)
I believe that these great numbers would have originally been understood not of actual age, but importance of the personages.
0% (0 votes)
Undecided.
19% (4 votes)
Other
10% (2 votes)
Total votes: 21
117 reads