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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
That's easy No smoking:cigar:, they ate the right kind of foods, no artificial additives, no ,:hotdog: ,opcorn:,Junk food. Unpolluted water, They got plenty of :sleep:How is it that the early peoples described in the OT lived to be 200+ years?
Has anyone ever thought that, since different men wrote different parts of the bible, that they may have used different time frames? We already know that the information throughout the bible is not fluid and cohesive. If you consider that lifespans have been increasing throughout time, not decreasing, then it stands to reason that people would have lived for much shorter timespans in that era than now. It is possible that the ones tracking lifespans were using lunar months instead of solar years. Divide 600, 700, 800, and 900 by 13 (lunar months to a year) and you get...46, 54, 61, and 69. Ages, for that era, that would be considered old to extremely old.
It because at the beginning Adam and Eve were created perfect, but when they sinned they became imperfect, so therefore they died, but passed on their imperfectness to all their children.
The live get shorterv and shorter because the perfection got bred out of the line of man and our bodies became weak
Remember one fact that scientists have said. Hukans regenerate every seven years, until the age of 21 when wee start to slowly die. thats the imperfection of sin stopping our bodies from keeping on being young and healthy.
But we have the hope of God maing things right for us in the end
They didn't have preservatives in their foodHow is it that the early peoples described in the OT lived to be 200+ years?
How is it that the early peoples described in the OT lived to be 200+ years?
Adam and Eve didn't exist. Genesis, if not complete fiction, would be allegorical, not literal, as we know for fact that the earth did not come to be in the way that was described.
Yeah but thats now that we have those medical breakthroughs and such. But if you read the bible and believe it, Adam and Eve lived for over 900 years each and now most of use can not even make it to our 70'sSecond, we, the human species, HAVE been getting older, taller, and more intelligent as a whole. We have not degraded, we have improved.
Or may be its too hard for you to handle the bible as Gods Inspired word or that mayb the same words were used to describe things time and again considering the Old Testementv was written in the same language as each other and the New Testement was written in the same language as each other.Honestly though, if you were to seriously read my post and stop yourself from your knee-jerk reaction to repeat yourself about Adam and Eve...it makes sense. Do the math. If the unit for measurement was simply called a different word than we currently use..."year" for "lunar month"...add into that that different books of the bible were written by different men and it is entirely possible that they weren't all using the same descriptor words for the same periods of time. But I guess, perhaps, a logical analysis of such a book is too much for some people to handle.
How is it that the early peoples described in the OT lived to be 200+ years?
Oh, you're one of those people.How do we know for fact that the earth did not come into being as it says in Genesis?
Where is the corroborating evidence from other cultures, from anywhere outside the bible, that gives ages of humans as such? Please show me where people, just hundreds of years before now had longer life spans than now. I realize that I'm in a DIR section and am not trying to debate really. Just want you to think.Yeah but thats now that we have those medical breakthroughs and such. But if you read the bible and believe it, Adam and Eve lived for over 900 years each and now most of use can not even make it to our 70's
Ah, but different words can sometimes be used to describe the same thing and vice versa. If I were to say to wait a "while" does that give you an exact time? Also, since different words could be used AND the bible has been translated it is possible that some words and meanings were not translated fluidly. Men are not perfect. Men wrote the bible, whether you want to say it is inspired or not, men put the pens to paper, AND men translated the books of the bible into another language. Whenever you translate something from one language to another you have incongruities. So there you have two very reasonable and logical reasons why the ages could be wrong in the bible.Or may be its too hard for you to handle the bible as Gods Inspired word or that mayb the same words were used to describe things time and again considering the Old Testementv was written in the same language as each other and the New Testement was written in the same language as each other.
Yep I amOh, you're one of those people.
Where is the corroborating evidence from other cultures, from anywhere outside the bible, that gives ages of humans as such? Please show me where people, just hundreds of years before now had longer life spans than now. I realize that I'm in a DIR section and am not trying to debate really. Just want you to think.
Also you use the word While. I know other things from the scriptures I cread are true, so I can confidently say, that the ages in genesis are also. The things is you get incongruities, but none so major as you are talking.Ah, but different words can sometimes be used to describe the same thing and vice versa. If I were to say to wait a "while" does that give you an exact time? Also, since different words could be used AND the bible has been translated it is possible that some words and meanings were not translated fluidly. Men are not perfect. Men wrote the bible, whether you want to say it is inspired or not, men put the pens to paper, AND men translated the books of the bible into another language. Whenever you translate something from one language to another you have incongruities. So there you have two very reasonable and logical reasons why the ages could be wrong in the bible.
When you use the number 13 in connection to proving your theory, I cant help but be reminded of things like FRIDAY the 13th and how people are so superstitious about the number 13 and how it is a unlucky number and so forth, knowing that these superstitions are not of Gods teachings tends to make me know they are satans teachings, therefore I stay away from satans teachings and stay firm in my knowledge of the scriptures.Oh, and did you try my math at all? Divide these old old ages by 13. There are 13 lunar months to a year. Full moon to full moon. If some were counting that way the ages make more sense.
Yep I am
I am not talking about only hundred of years before now am i? I am talking thousands of years before the Romans. If you want to think the way of man go ahead, but I will not be lead down the garden path as I had been before I found the truth about the way things really are. If you want to trust in man go ahead, but I would rather trust in something other than the beings that have ruled us since the start of sin entering into the world and have lead us up the perverbial garden path into the state of utter kaos we currently live under.
Also you use the word While. I know other things from the scriptures I cread are true, so I can confidently say, that the ages in genesis are also. The things is you get incongruities, but none so major as you are talking.
When you use the number 13 in connection to proving your theory, I cant help but be reminded of things like FRIDAY the 13th and how people are so superstitious about the number 13 and how it is a unlucky number and so forth, knowing that these superstitions are not of Gods teachings tends to make me know they are satans teachings, therefore I stay away from satans teachings and stay firm in my knowledge of the scriptures.
Ephesians 6: 5-18 YOU slaves, be obedient to those who are [YOUR] masters in a fleshly sense, with fear and trembling in the sincerity of YOUR hearts, as to the Christ, not by way of eye-service as men pleasers, but as Christ’s slaves, doing the will of God whole-souled. Be slaves with good inclinations, as to Jehovah, and not to men, for YOU know that each one, whatever good he may do, will receive this back from Jehovah, whether he be slave or freeman. Also, YOU masters, keep doing the same things to them, letting up on the threatening, for YOU know that the Master of both them and YOU is in the heavens, and there is no partiality with him.
Finally, go on acquiring power in [the] Lord and in the mightiness of his strength. Put on the complete suit of armor from God that YOU may be able to stand firm against the machinations of the Devil; because we have a wrestling, not against blood and flesh, but against the governments, against the authorities, against the world rulers of this darkness, against the wicked spirit forces in the heavenly places. On this account take up the complete suit of armor from God, that YOU may be able to resist in the wicked day and, after YOU have done all things thoroughly, to stand firm.
Stand firm, therefore, with YOUR loins girded about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness, and with YOUR feet shod with the equipment of the good news of peace. Above all things, take up the large shield of faith, with which YOU will be able to quench all the wicked one’s burning missiles. Also, accept the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the spirit, that is, God’s word, while with every form of prayer and supplication YOU carry on prayer on every occasion in spirit
Putting faith in God. maybe written by men, but hev inspired it, so it comes from God anyway. kind of like the earth, it was physically created by Jesus, but it was Gods Plan.Firstly, putting your ramble aside, you are putting your faith in men from long ago who wrote and translated the bible. So please don't lecture about not putting faith in men.
Second, the number 13 isn't an unlucky or superstitious number. If it were then why didn't Jesus decide to only have 11 apostles instead of 12? By having 12, and then adding himself into the the group, you had an overall group of 13. Compare to a coven as you will. Besides, I used 13 for a reason I guess I have to explain to you once again. There are 13 cycles of the moon in one calendar year. These are called lunar months. When you figure that keeping track of full moon to full moon would be a much simpler way to track time than going by seasons, to do the math and divide 969 (Methusela) by 13 you get approximately 74.5 and 930 (Adam) becomes 71.5. If they were using the same word for both a calendar year and a lunar month then the confusion would be easy to see. However if you try out the dividing by 13 trick you should see that my suggestion becomes very plausible.
I can't help but wonder why some people never want to consider that I just could be on to something here. :areyoucra It's not heresy to suggest that the dating methods could have been different than what we use now, or that they used different dating methods throughout the bible.
lockyfan, good luck to you in your beliefs, no matter how wrong I think you are you have that right. I am pulling out of this conversation as I know I have already probably gone too far in this DIR section.
It because at the beginning Adam and Eve were created perfect, but when they sinned they became imperfect, so therefore they died, but passed on their imperfectness to all their children.
The live get shorterv and shorter because the perfection got bred out of the line of man and our bodies became weak
Remember one fact that scientists have said. Hukans regenerate every seven years, until the age of 21 when wee start to slowly die. thats the imperfection of sin stopping our bodies from keeping on being young and healthy.
But we have the hope of God maing things right for us in the end