Posted on 02/17/2017 7:30:35 AM PST by Salvation
I occasionally get questions about the remarkably long lives of the patriarchs who lived before the great flood. Consider the ages at which these figures purportedly died:
How should we understand these references? Many theories have been proposed to explain the claimed longevity. Some use a mathematical corrective, but this leads to other pitfalls such as certain patriarchs apparently begetting children while still children themselves. Another theory proposes that the purported life spans of the patriarchs are just indications of their influence or family line, but then things don’t add up chronologically with eras and family trees.
Personally, I think we need to take the stated life spans of the patriarchs at face value and just accept it as a mystery: for some reason, the ancient patriarchs lived far longer than we do in the modern era. I cannot prove that they actually lived that long, but neither is there strong evidence that they did not. Frankly, I have little stake in insisting that they did in fact live to be that old. But if you ask me, I think it is best just to accept that they did.
This solution, when I articulate it, causes many to scoff. They almost seem to be offended. The reply usually sounds something like this: “That’s crazy. There’s no way they lived that long. The texts must be wrong.” To which I generally reply, “Why do you think it’s crazy or impossible?” The answers usually range from the glib to the more serious, but here are some common replies:
So I think we’re back to where we started: just taking the long life spans of the early patriarchs at face value.
There is perhaps a theological truth hidden in the shrinking lifespans of the Old Testament. The Scriptures link sin and death. Adam and Eve were warned that the day they ate of the forbidden fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, they would die (Gen 2:17), but they did not drop dead immediately. Although they died spiritually in an instant, the clock of death for their bodies wound down much later. As the age listing above shows, as sin increased, lifespans dropped precipitously, especially after the flood.
Prior to the flood, lifespans remained in the vicinity of 900 years, but right afterward they dropped by about a third (Shem only lived to 600), and then the numbers plummeted even further. Neither Abraham nor Moses even reached 200, and by the time of King David, he would write, Our years are seventy, or eighty for those who are strong (Ps 90:10).
Scripture says, For the wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23). Indeed they are, especially in terms of lifespan. Perhaps that is why I am not too anxious to try to disprove the long life spans of the patriarchs, for what we know theologically is borne out in our human experience: sin is life-destroying. This truth is surely made clear by the declining lifespan of the human family.
Does this prove that Adam actually lived to be more than 900 years old? No, it only shows that declining life spans are something we fittingly discover in a world of sin. God teaches that sin brings death, so why should we be shocked that our life span has decreased from 900 years to about 85? It is what it is. It’s a sad truth about which God warned us. Thanks be to God our Father, who in Jesus now offers us eternal life, if we will have faith and obey His Son!
How or even whether the patriarchs lived to such advanced ages is not clear, but what is theologically clear is that we don’t live that long today because of the collective effect of sin upon us.
Genesis 6King James Version (KJV)
6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Exactly. A film critic of my aquaintence had a stock saying for well made but highly unlikely films in terms of premis: “Buy the premis, buy the flick.
Note: God didn’t instruct man on eating meat until he gave it to Noah after the flood.
I’m not vegetarian, but man may have been up to that point.
Also note that God specifically states that after the flood he’s only going to give man 120 years, although it was not an immediate limitation.
At 100 comments in, I’m amazed by the number of folks who seemingly haven’t even read, let alone studied, the OT for context and understanding.
No need to memorize the begats, or the wars, or the boundaries.
If you have no context for prophecy how can you understand it’s fulfillment?
Do you recall that Abraham lied about Sarah being his wife, because at 99 she was so attractive the King wanted her for himself?
Maybe both the spin and the orbit were different.
Why would God say his is changing the life span of humans if he is really just changing the length of the day and length of the year.
It seems a little dishonest.
Some people want to see a natural way to explain the events of the Bible. I believe God is a supernatural agency and he can change humanity’s lifespan with a word (kind of like how he created the entire universe).
The announcement that "his days will be 120 years" means the clock was ticking for Noah to build God's Ark. The rain would start 120 years from that day.
IMHO, the reason mans years started to decline was the changes in the Earth after the Flood. The Earth could have been as much as 10% smaller due to the waters of the deep coming to the surface. Sorta like squeezing a sponge. The water in the atmosphere fell to earth leaving man exposed to UV rays, and on and on, with life shortening changes from the effects of the Flood. Some reckon the atmospheric pressure was cut in half and gravity changed.
The thing to take forward for me would be the "120 years" reference was not the estimated years of longevity, but a cut off point for Noah's Ark to be finished. The very name "Methuselah" meant in Hebrew when he died the end would come. Methuselah died and the rain started, all on God's timetable. Noah was 600 yo when the rain started. Could this be transposed into 6000 years of man and then God's judgement comes,...I don't know, but Noah and the Ark is a "type and shadow" of the rapture and the Judgement of God coming in the future. Many people haven't noticed that God told Noah to enter the Ark 7 days before the rain started. This is for the people that say we can't know the day or the hour, but Jesus will call for His Bride on some Rosh Hashanah in the future. That is the "Day no one knows" for a Jew as it lasts for 48 hrs. The church will be warned before God's judgement falls if you have "ears to hear". Luke 17:26-30. Not one drop of rain fell on Noah nor one rock of Brimstone fell on Lot. God's people will be brought into the safety of God's provision before His judgement falls on the Earth. 1 Thess 5:1 tells us the Jews know the day and hour the thief comes. Gentiles won't know because they don't reverence the Lord's Days spoken of in Leviticus 23.
“God was disgusted by the fallen angels mating with women to produce half breed Nephilim”
Uh...no.
The “sons of God” refers to Seth’s line, who had remained faithful to God.
The “daughters of men” refers to Cain’s line, who had not.
There was no instance of fallen angels mating with humans.
Seth's line cannot be Sons of God. Seth was a man born of man. Sons of God are born of God. Son's of God are Adam, Jesus, Angels, and we are given the right to become Son's of God through rebirth in the Spirit.
Adam was mud, breathed into by the Holy Spirit to become a living soul. He was directly created by God. Jesus was born of the Holy Spirit hovering over Mary, a virgin, for conception. Seth was a man, conceived of a fallen woman.
We must die to the flesh and be reborn of the Holy Spirit to become Son's of God. Look up the requirements of the High Priest to take a wife. He requires a virgin. The Sons spoken of in Gen 6 are definitely fallen angels. How would the sperm of man create gigantic freaks?
It would help if you looked at all of the reference to Sons of God, meaning those faithful to him.
Seth, Jacob, Joseph, etc.
Try defending your notion that fallen angels mated with humans....
comic book theology!
The righteous line of Seth (sons of God) intermarries with the godless lined of Cain (daughters of men) and become corrupted (except for Noah).
This interpretation appears in rabbinic tradition (Genesis Rabbah 26, 5-7; b. Sanhedrin 108a) and in the Church Fathers ( St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Geness 22, 8; St. Augustine, City of God 15,23; St. Ephraem, Comentary on Genesis6,30).
While Israel were held as slaves in Egypt for 400 years, Satan had that time to set a trap for Israel in Canaan. Remember they were as grasshoppers in their eyes.
Read Lev 18:22-30 and see that God removed the evil that was Canaan to give to the Jews because of their sin. It's beyond me how righteous men mating with women could produce such a mess. The DNA of the Canaanites was fouled up from this union of Sethites? I don't think so. Why else would God cast out "righteous Sons of God" and replace them with freed slaves? Answer,...they weren't righteous Sons of God, but fallen Son's of God.
Nothing is either “answered” or “logical” in your response, and further you have no scholarship to substantiate it.
You have no basis for your “old but mistaken” claim.
Cain’s line is larger because they had to toil so much harder for their survival.
As for “foolish analysis”.....well....we have fallen angels mating with humans...
oh....and then humans defeating the fallen angels.....
It really is that simple, isn't it?
It has been my experience (and it is a logical certainty, I think) that, if a person is not impressed with the Bible, then he cannot be impressed with the God of the Bible. If she is not impressed with the Bible nor the God Who is revealed therein, she cannot possibly yet be a candidate for salvation by grace through faith.
That is because, from my extensive study of the Bible, acceptance of the Gospel (the best deal in history -- His righteousness in a straight-across exchange for our sin and sinfulness) can only occur when two factors emerge in an individual:
1) the person is IMPRESSED with the God of the Bible, and
2)he becomes DESPERATE for Him.
Since the former premise has to precede the latter (I think), people who are not impressed with the Bible are not yet ready to be saved. And that is what I usually tell them. But I always also tell them to keep that thought somewhere in the mind, and revisit it from time to time when occasions arise concerning the destiny of the soul.
It really is that simple, isn't it?
It has been my experience (and it is a logical certainty, I think) that, if a person is not impressed with the Bible, then he cannot be impressed with the God of the Bible. If she is not impressed with the Bible nor the God Who is revealed therein, she cannot possibly yet be a candidate for salvation by grace through faith (since faith comes by hearing the Word of God).
That is because, from my extensive study of the Bible, acceptance of the Gospel (the best deal in history -- His righteousness in a straight-across exchange for our sin and sinfulness) can only occur when two factors emerge in an individual:
1) the person is IMPRESSED with the God of the Bible, and
2) he becomes DESPERATE for Him.
Since the former premise has to precede the latter (I think), people who are not impressed with the Bible are not yet ready to be saved. And that is what I usually tell them. But I always also tell them to keep that thought somewhere in the mind, and revisit it from time to time when occasions arise concerning the destiny of the soul.
Sorry for the double post. This site has become very touchy that way lately. Or maybe it’s just my fat fingers on my little keyboard.
I’ve often been slightly amused at people being outright offended to the point of calling me crazy, by the notion of a literal understanding of I Corinthians 15, but then refer them back to a new heaven and a new Earth, in Isaiah and Revelation.
Things just fall into place, as I mentioned.
Remember the spies that went into Canaan? Only 2 had a good report. They had faith that God said the land would be given to them. The others looked at the size of the warriors.
Apparently you didn't watch the Youtube video I posted.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.