-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
200+
- Thread starter Phasmid
- Start date
Troublemane
Well-Known Member
because they were names of people passed on over several generations maybe 
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
They'd no TV so it just felt like it.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Babylon/canaanite king lists.
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
Yeah, since Adam and Eve were as close to having perfect bodies as possible they lived longer. We are the result of thousands of years of imbreeding. That and the fact that medical advances allow weaker genetics to survive and reproduce. As a result we have much weaker physiologies and shorter lifespans.
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
I thought it was that age was calculated by taking each of your offspring as a decade. So if you had twenty kids, you were 200 years old. I'm not sure where I heard that from, but it sticks out in my mind.
Charred.Atheist
Reverend
That's desperately grasping..because they were names of people passed on over several generations maybe
Charred.Atheist
Reverend
But the lifespan is increasing and has been for a very long time.. Even with a wind down and then back up, we would have much more evidence of people living longer, not that long ago..
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
But that's contrary to the way genetics works, which is that the organism constantly improves, not regresses.
it is because Adam and Eve were created perfect and had perfect bodies.
they were warned that if they sinned against God they would die (because si is imperfection) and they CHOSE to sin against God and God then followed through with what he said his punishment was going to be. Which is sin.
Then as the generations wore down, so did the human bodies ability to regenerate (which it has been scientifically proven it does once every seven years until you are 21 and then stops and scientists have no idea why) but it is because of sin that we die.
anyway the modern advances of technology has given us the chance to live longer now. but not forever, because only when God destroys the system of things that we live in now, will we be able to have to chance of living forever.
they were warned that if they sinned against God they would die (because si is imperfection) and they CHOSE to sin against God and God then followed through with what he said his punishment was going to be. Which is sin.
Then as the generations wore down, so did the human bodies ability to regenerate (which it has been scientifically proven it does once every seven years until you are 21 and then stops and scientists have no idea why) but it is because of sin that we die.
anyway the modern advances of technology has given us the chance to live longer now. but not forever, because only when God destroys the system of things that we live in now, will we be able to have to chance of living forever.
Popeyesays
Well-Known Member
I would suggest that the year in Judaic terms is only 360 days, for a start.
It is the habit in some traditions to mark the beginning of a year whenever some memorable event occurs--also to start a new calendar at the coronation of a king, for instance. There are many reasons to make a year not quite a year in some societies. What if one counted a new year at the birth of each child? That would make nine month years.
Today we mark years by reaching a mutually agreed upon new point in the rotation of the earth, that does not mean that was the case back in ancient times.
ALso years were marked differently in different cultures . . . . . . . just to add to the confusion. SHort form: Read it with several grains of salt.
Demanding one literal meaning to any scripture is a formula for disaster.
Regards,
Scott
It is the habit in some traditions to mark the beginning of a year whenever some memorable event occurs--also to start a new calendar at the coronation of a king, for instance. There are many reasons to make a year not quite a year in some societies. What if one counted a new year at the birth of each child? That would make nine month years.
Today we mark years by reaching a mutually agreed upon new point in the rotation of the earth, that does not mean that was the case back in ancient times.
ALso years were marked differently in different cultures . . . . . . . just to add to the confusion. SHort form: Read it with several grains of salt.
Demanding one literal meaning to any scripture is a formula for disaster.
Regards,
Scott
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
Not when imbreeding occurs.
Only natural selection or genetic engineering improves genetics.
So better medical care that allows those with weak genetics to survive and procreate will help decrease the genetic health of a group. So will repetative procreation within groups of individuals with similar genetics.
Scott1
Well-Known Member
I can think of two things:
1. They are just stories.
2. Bad translations:
But when we compare the Massoretic text with the Samaritan version and the Septuagint, we are confronted by many and strange discrepancies which can hardly be the result of mere accident. Thus, for instance, with regard to the antediluvian patriarchs, while the Samaritan version agrees in the main with the Massoretic text, the age at which Jared begot his first-born is set down as 62 instead of the Hebrew 162. Mathusala, likewise, who according to the Hebrew begot his first-born at the age of 187, was only 67 according to the Samaritan; and though the Hebrew places the same event in the case of Lamech when he was 182, the Samaritan gives him only 53. Similar discrepancies exist between the two texts as regards the total number of years that these patriarchs lived, viz. Jared, Heb. 962, Sam. 847; Mathusala, Heb. 969, Sam. 720; Lamech, Heb. 777, Sam. 653.
Comparing the Massoretic text with the Septuagint, we find that in the latter the birth of the first-born in the case of Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Malaleel, and Henoch was at the respective ages of 230, 205, 190, 170, 165, and 165, as against 130, 105, 90, 70, 65, and 65 as stated in the Hebrew. The same systematic difference of 100 years in the period before the birth of the first-born appears likewise in the lives of the postdiluvian patriarchs, Arphaxad, Sale, Heber, Phaleg, Reu, and Sarug. For this list, however, the Samaritan agrees with the Septuagint as against the Massoretic text.
http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/bible_books_old_1.htm
Comparing the Massoretic text with the Septuagint, we find that in the latter the birth of the first-born in the case of Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Malaleel, and Henoch was at the respective ages of 230, 205, 190, 170, 165, and 165, as against 130, 105, 90, 70, 65, and 65 as stated in the Hebrew. The same systematic difference of 100 years in the period before the birth of the first-born appears likewise in the lives of the postdiluvian patriarchs, Arphaxad, Sale, Heber, Phaleg, Reu, and Sarug. For this list, however, the Samaritan agrees with the Septuagint as against the Massoretic text.
http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/bible_books_old_1.htm
3.14
Well-Known Member
wel 2 things first there were we have a cellular decay at a certain point where we grow old and die without that cells would just keep restoring themselfs (exept braincells) so if there was no major trauma and plenty of food you could grow realy old
in the old days people didn't protect the weak so they died nowadays the weak reproduce and cause more weakness, and they started out with stronger immune systeem
in the old days people didn't protect the weak so they died nowadays the weak reproduce and cause more weakness, and they started out with stronger immune systeem
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
It almost makes me want to support a eugenics program. How long could humans survive if we are just a mass of weak deseased cells.