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.
As a kid, I figured out those “years” were probably months. Nothing has shown me I should change my mind.
No, he only made it to 949yrs. and 6mo.
No reason Noah didn’t live that long.
You can’t apply the conditions to day to those who were much closer in time to creation and had virtually uncorrupted DNA and lived in a different physical environment.
Three of the first six US Presidents lived beyond their 80th birthday. None of the next 23 did.
ML/NJ
It seems to me that this can probably be shown to be untrue.
Consider this:
“The lifetime odds of dying from an accidental injury for a person born in 2013 were 1 in 20.”
Whereas accidents that we would be subject to would be different today than the pre-flood years, the vast majority would be similar. Ie; your cave collapsing on you, a tree falling on you, falling off a cliff, eating spoiled food, getting attacked by a Pit Bull, falling off your horse, drownings etc...
Bottom line, if you eliminated all cause of deaths except for accidental you still wouldn’t live to be 900 YO.
Anyone care to comment?
The earth PRIOR to Noah was VERY different from after the ‘flood’.
Does the Bible say that prior to the flood, it didn’t rain?
Why? -probably because there wasn’t a need for rain which may mean the whole of the earth was rather like a tropical rain forest. LOTS of moisture all the time.
And then came the flood; the waters broke up from the deep as well as rain from the sky... HUGE change happened.
After the flood, our atmosphere became what we have now.
Also after the flood, men’s life-spans got significantly shorter. It ALL changes with that flood and the breaking up of the deep, as the Bible states.
Couldn’t THAT be a valid reason to believe this. After all, God didn’t create man to die.
WE chose that path.
And those of you who think this is all hogwash, Good luck to you.
We’re talking about an entity that created EVERYTHING out of nothing at all but that there are things, such as age, subsequent to that that I must scoff at due to the improbability of it. Ooooooook...
ML/NJ
I found these articles (videos) very interesting, I listened to Chuck Missler for years. In fact I still do:
The Flood of Noah: The Deluge by Chuck Missler
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2004/504/
Some other links:
http://www.khouse.org/articles/1997/12/
Some other Videos:
I always thought the earth had to be spinning much, much faster before the flood. Something celestial occurred along with the flood but if your in a hurricane how would you know?
Adam’s body was designed to live forever. When he sinned, he was doomed to die, just not right away. The first few generations lived to extreme ages. As time went by, those ages got shorter. I don’t believe that this is far fetched at all.
Yes, Noah really did live that long.
> Perhaps I';ve misunderstood you.
Do you really mean that?
And, if so, does that make it easier for folk to take your religion seriously?
For anyone interested:
Chuck Missler: Hidden Codes - Adam to Noah; Names, Translations, Prophecy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1zZAkzLPEo
bfl
bfl
Even if the days were shorter, the years would remain the same, just more days in a year.
God sets our lifespan, whether short or long.
Great article here that answers, scientifically, how the lives have gone from nearly 1000 to maybe 100ish.
http://www.icr.org/article/more-mysteries-for-science-long-life
- I think there was another, more recent one, on this subject of ‘genetic age switch’ from a secular site. I’ve yet to find it again though.
>No reason Noah didn’t live that long.
>
>You can’t apply the conditions to day to those who were much >closer in time to creation and had virtually uncorrupted DNA >and lived in a different physical environment.
Spot on! Furthermore, my philosophy of mortal life being a test, requires interaction with other people which creates opportunities for us to love our fellows and serve them OR love only ourselves and use our fellows. Back in Adam’s day, with a big empty world, people could wander off “east of Eden” without any human contact. They needed 900 years in order to achieve the same amount of social interaction that we get in 70.
If it doesn't make sense to you it's just a story...The bible then is just a fable, for the most part...How do you know what parts are true???
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.