-
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!
Did Adam really live to be 930 years old?
- Thread starter Bangbang
- Start date
MdmSzdWhtGuy
Well-Known Member
Seems to be a pretty clear pattern in recorded history that the farther back we go from modern times, the shorter the average lifespan was. This is in large part to so many dying of childhood diseases, and in childbirth, but even taking those out of the mix, you still get less and less elderly people surviving to an old age the farther we go back in history.
I think that story's of Adam, Methuselah, Noah, etc. . . . living to a very old age were merely fantastical tales to give the stories more interest to those hearing them. So I would vote that, if there ever was a Biblical Adam, which in itself is very unlikely, then he most probably did not live to be 900+ years old.
B.
I think that story's of Adam, Methuselah, Noah, etc. . . . living to a very old age were merely fantastical tales to give the stories more interest to those hearing them. So I would vote that, if there ever was a Biblical Adam, which in itself is very unlikely, then he most probably did not live to be 900+ years old.
B.
Atheist_Dave
*Foxy Lady*
People living till they were 900 + doesn't make any evolutionary sense either, Surely if they lived that long they would reproduce a lot, and pass their genes to so many people, and most of us would be living till we 900+. So no I do not think he lived till he was 900+, (if he existed at all which I am certain he didn't)
Peace x
Peace x
Aqualung
Tasty
The thing about how the further you go back, the lower the lifespan is in some ways a bit incorrect. Yes, people didn't live quite as long. But if they made it past their childhood years, they had a great chance of living a long time (perhaps like 70 or so). The "average lifespan" is reduced due to the number of infant deaths, and doesn't accurately portray how old people were actually living if they made it out of childhood.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Living 900+ years would be hard. I doubt that many people would have had the stamina for it. I don't think it happened.
i think the bible is correct and Adam did live to 930 ,just goes to show how imperfect we are now ,
Paradise, happiness, and everlasting life were forfeited, and in their place sin, suffering, and death "Through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned." "Death ruled as king from Adam down." (Ro 5:12, 14)
since God can view 1,000 years as one day, when Adams life ended at 930 years, it was within one "day." (2 Peter 3:8; Genesis 5:3-5)
However, let this one fact not be escaping YOUR notice, beloved ones, that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day
Paradise, happiness, and everlasting life were forfeited, and in their place sin, suffering, and death "Through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned." "Death ruled as king from Adam down." (Ro 5:12, 14)
since God can view 1,000 years as one day, when Adams life ended at 930 years, it was within one "day." (2 Peter 3:8; Genesis 5:3-5)
However, let this one fact not be escaping YOUR notice, beloved ones, that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day
Aqualung
Tasty
I think there are a couple of possibilities with this one.
Those are all the different ideas I can think of. I tend to go with either the first one or the second one.
- He really did live to 900+
- The people who wrote the Bible were using literary technique
- The people who wrote it lied
- The people who wrote it did not measure years the same way
- Scribal error
Those are all the different ideas I can think of. I tend to go with either the first one or the second one.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
No.Bangbang said:
There are Sumerian king myths that have similar names in the geneologies of Genesis, and the fellers lived comparably long. Genesis shares characteristics with not only Mediterranean creation stories and flood myths, but also Sumerian, Ugarit(ian?), Caananite, and Babylonian myths about giants and fellers who lived a long time. A good critical commentary on Genesis will demonstrate parallels with other myths, sometimes speculating that the myths may have shared a common source.
EDIT: I can't understand why one myth would be correct and another incorrect. How long did Zeus live? What about Gilgamesh or the Norse gods? What about Thor?
cardero
Citizen Mod
Keep in mind that if that age could be achieved back in Biblical times it may be because that there were less circumstances to instigate death. I could think of 12,647 ways to die right now, yet if this assignment was given to someone else they could come up with other reasons that I have not mentioned. People could say that with our progress in medical care, we should be living longer but in actuality we have been devising new ways to end our existence with other means of technology or disregards to our ecology. Could it have possibly happen, could man actually have exceeded 200 years? No, I do not think that these bodies no matter how well they have been created and no matter how well we could take care of them, could ever exceed a lifetime past 130 years.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
However, in a myth, anything can happen.cardero said:
Scholars have come up with some very creative reasons why Adam "lived" for so long. It served some purpose, but I don't think that there is a conclusive answer.
Atheist_Dave
*Foxy Lady*
No matter how healthy a human is, no matter how careful they are, no matter how safe the world is, genes will not let us live much longer than 100. After our reproductive purpose has been reached and we grow infertile, we are essentially dying. No human can ever have lived that long, it is impossible.
Peace x
Peace x
Surely such certainty is based on evidence. Would you mind sharing it?Aqualung said:
Far better to keep in mind that the only reason you entertain such a notion is because of the folklore of a primitive people.cardero said:
Atheist_Dave
*Foxy Lady*
Jayhawker the only evidence you can expect is "the bible says so", which equates to diddly squat. 
It will be interesting to see what evidence aqualung comes out with though...
Peace x
It will be interesting to see what evidence aqualung comes out with though...Peace x
Did Adam really live to be 930 years old? - No, I don't belive he did.
I do wonder though, if it is not possible to explain the 'ages' , as in thefollowing site (not that I know if it is a 'realible' source)
http://www.letusreason.org/current7.htm
Genesis means origin, source, beginnings. First given to Moses so that the revelation of mans history could be taught to The Jewish nation as well as the laws of God. For thousands of years it was taught as a literal 7 days. Now as science has exercised its influence over society and the Church the scripture is being challenged.
Today there is a teaching gaining popularity in the Church called Progressive creationism. This theory is also known as the day-age theory. Progressive creationism is an attempt to reconcile the Bible with current scientific knowledge. Those who are progressive creationists uphold the creation of man by God and general categories of species found in Genesis 1-2. They believe in "intrakind" development within the species by adaptation to environment (microevolution) and reject "interkind" development of species such as Darwin's theory (macroevolution). There are also progressive creationists that do hold to Darwin's theory as well.
Progressive creationism is based in part on Psalm 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8 They reject a literal six-day creation and substitute each day representing enormous lengths of time. The days of creation are not to be understood as twenty four hours but as ages or dispensations. Traditionally, the day-age theory held that the days were equivalent to geological ages. However, this posed several problems with the fossil record since it did not exhibit this. The creation of plants bearing seeds prior to the creation of land animals posed a problem in that some seeds depended on insects for pollination and fertilization.
Are the days of creation representative of geological ages or are they 7 literal days. The gap between Gen.1-2 and the days are used by some to validate Dinosaurs and other species and even early hominids before man. The book of Genesis came from Moses who received the revelation from God as he was on the Mountain 40 days and nights. While we can speculate whether it is all from the Lord at that time or Moses might have also used other various traditions orally or written. One thing is sure, it is a perfect accurate record.
The word Day (Heb. yom), used both in the particular sense of a natural day and in the general sense of a set time or period of time such as in the day of the Lord "Yom adonai" which will last 7 years. The word "day" can be used of an indefinite period, "the day" or "day that" means in general "that time" (Gen. 2:4; Lev. 14:2); "day of trouble" Ps 20:1; "day of his wrath" Job 20:28; "day of salvation" 2 Cor 6:2;. "Day of Jesus Christ" Phil 1:6.
The "day of Yahweh" Isa. 2:12; "day of the Lord" 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Pet 3:10; Zeph. 1:7; for the day of the LORD is at hand, Zeph. 1:10 "And there shall be on that day," says the LORD, " Joel 2:11 For the day of the LORD is great and very terrible; who can endure it? This is describing a particular event for a time period and not a single day, although it may include a single day.
In Dan 7:9,13 God is called "the ancient of days." meaning he is beyond our measurement of time. In 2 Pt.3:8 Where he states, "that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." This is generally Showing the timelessness of God and how mans lifetime and history cannot compare to God. In context it refers to the day of the Lord. This is not teaching a doctrine of one thousand years is equal to one day specifically of the Lord. God is not measured by time, he is eternal, infinite living outside time. He was there long before time was created.
I do wonder though, if it is not possible to explain the 'ages' , as in thefollowing site (not that I know if it is a 'realible' source)
http://www.letusreason.org/current7.htm
Genesis means origin, source, beginnings. First given to Moses so that the revelation of mans history could be taught to The Jewish nation as well as the laws of God. For thousands of years it was taught as a literal 7 days. Now as science has exercised its influence over society and the Church the scripture is being challenged.
Today there is a teaching gaining popularity in the Church called Progressive creationism. This theory is also known as the day-age theory. Progressive creationism is an attempt to reconcile the Bible with current scientific knowledge. Those who are progressive creationists uphold the creation of man by God and general categories of species found in Genesis 1-2. They believe in "intrakind" development within the species by adaptation to environment (microevolution) and reject "interkind" development of species such as Darwin's theory (macroevolution). There are also progressive creationists that do hold to Darwin's theory as well.
Progressive creationism is based in part on Psalm 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8 They reject a literal six-day creation and substitute each day representing enormous lengths of time. The days of creation are not to be understood as twenty four hours but as ages or dispensations. Traditionally, the day-age theory held that the days were equivalent to geological ages. However, this posed several problems with the fossil record since it did not exhibit this. The creation of plants bearing seeds prior to the creation of land animals posed a problem in that some seeds depended on insects for pollination and fertilization.
Are the days of creation representative of geological ages or are they 7 literal days. The gap between Gen.1-2 and the days are used by some to validate Dinosaurs and other species and even early hominids before man. The book of Genesis came from Moses who received the revelation from God as he was on the Mountain 40 days and nights. While we can speculate whether it is all from the Lord at that time or Moses might have also used other various traditions orally or written. One thing is sure, it is a perfect accurate record.
The word Day (Heb. yom), used both in the particular sense of a natural day and in the general sense of a set time or period of time such as in the day of the Lord "Yom adonai" which will last 7 years. The word "day" can be used of an indefinite period, "the day" or "day that" means in general "that time" (Gen. 2:4; Lev. 14:2); "day of trouble" Ps 20:1; "day of his wrath" Job 20:28; "day of salvation" 2 Cor 6:2;. "Day of Jesus Christ" Phil 1:6.
The "day of Yahweh" Isa. 2:12; "day of the Lord" 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Pet 3:10; Zeph. 1:7; for the day of the LORD is at hand, Zeph. 1:10 "And there shall be on that day," says the LORD, " Joel 2:11 For the day of the LORD is great and very terrible; who can endure it? This is describing a particular event for a time period and not a single day, although it may include a single day.
In Dan 7:9,13 God is called "the ancient of days." meaning he is beyond our measurement of time. In 2 Pt.3:8 Where he states, "that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." This is generally Showing the timelessness of God and how mans lifetime and history cannot compare to God. In context it refers to the day of the Lord. This is not teaching a doctrine of one thousand years is equal to one day specifically of the Lord. God is not measured by time, he is eternal, infinite living outside time. He was there long before time was created.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
My vote is the first one, though the fourth one is a possibility too.Aqualung said: