Growing old

[atheistgirl]

Probably not for catholics but those that take a more literal view of the Bible … I was talking with a girlfriend not so long ago and she used the expression as old as Mathuzela (Spelling!). It got me thinking … some people of faith who literally believe the bible believe we are corupted by sin, and those living closest to the time of Adam, lived very long lives as per the Bible, and our lives shorten as we get further away from that point in time due to the effects of the corruption of sin.

So how do you explain then we are in fact living longer … and those born a few hunded years ago that we have birth and death details for, would have been living for well over a hundred years routinely, and we know that is simply not the case.

Where as today, we are finding more and more people living to be well into their 90’s and 100’s.

Sarah x

 

[Tomek]

So how do you explain then we are in fact living longer … and those born a few hunded years ago that we have birth and death details for, would have been living for well over a hundred years routinely, and we know that is simply not the case.

The longevity of early humans has more to do with the proliferation of the human race than anything else. As for why we live longer now than a few centuries ago, it has to do with medical advancement. Unfortunately not amount of technology can help repair the damage sin does to the soul.

Peace

 

[Doxiemom]

medical attention is helping to heal the damage already done. We still grow old and we still die. But we do not die before the damage is passed onto our children.

The decay factor still exists, whereas it did not exist in the Garden. We were never meant to grow old and die.

Living to 120 years is for us a fantastic idea, but it is a tiny poof of a feather compared to forever in a garden.

 

[atheistgirl]

I know it’s all down to better welfare, better diet, better public health, better medical health.

But we know the birth and death dates of people that lived hundreds and in some cases over a thousand years ago. And their lifespan was relatively short. As we would expect. Their lifespan isnt consistent with people living for many hundreds of years. In fact, we can estimate the natural lifespan of early man being into the mid twenties!

This is why Im interested in other faiths responses who believe we lived for many hundreds and hundreds of years, and then slowly this dropped to the current morbidity rate. There should be evidence of people routinely living for hundreds of years, or at least well over 100, in the 800s 900s 1000s and 1100s … but there isnt.

So Im interested in hearing their take on it.

Sarah x

 

[MartyrForJesus]

Probably isn’t literal, however I’ll wait for the experts.

 

[atheistgirl]

Probably isn’t literal, however I’ll wait for the experts.

I know catholics are not literalists - except perhaps for the parts concerning the eucharist - but I do know at least one person in real life who does believe we lived to be hundreds of years old, as it says, and as time goes on we live shorter and shorter lives due to the effect of sin. The exact opposite is the case as we know from the historical records.

Sarah x

 

[Warrior1979]

A lot of the “increase” in age is simply due to the decrease in infant death, which was extremely common before modern medicine. There are also plenty of examples of people living to old age in the past; e.g., Founding Fathers in the U.S.

As far as maximum age goes, the supported evidence I’ve seen places it around 122. The basis of that figure has to do with cell division and the mutation that occurs during the process. Cells can only divide a certain number of times before the life of the organism becomes unsustainable.

 

[Sufjon]

Probably not for catholics but those that take a more literal view of the Bible … I was talking with a girlfriend not so long ago and she used the expression as old as Mathuzela (Spelling!). It got me thinking … some people of faith who literally believe the bible believe we are corupted by sin, and those living closest to the time of Adam, lived very long lives as per the Bible, and our lives shorten as we get further away from that point in time due to the effects of the corruption of sin.

So how do you explain then we are in fact living longer … and those born a few hunded years ago that we have birth and death details for, would have been living for well over a hundred years routinely, and we know that is simply not the case.

Where as today, we are finding more and more people living to be well into their 90’s and 100’s.

Sarah x

Hi Sarah: Old Testament stories aside, there is nothing to suggest that early humans lived any longer than we do. Most remains found support the idea that life was short. There is nothing that has been found in early human, or even hominids that we ever lived longer than we do now, or indeed that we even lived as long as we do now. The Old Testament has some history in it, but it has some imagination in it. I think of it the same way I do an Alexander Dumas story - lots of fiction mingled with a lot of history. Unlike Dumas, it also has some primitive interpretations of natural events interspersed here and there. Modern Day early humans like Jerry Falwell and the like saw the same things in the hurricane that struck New Orleans, an if there Bible were written today, the event would surely be in there as God destroying the city over Mardi Gras or something.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

This has no bases in anything other than my head, but here it is anyway. God had mad Adam and Eve for live for eternity. sin brought death as men time moved on futher along from creation mans life sapn shortened. at the time of Christ it was about as short as it has ever been. As we moved toward the the second coming and Gods restoration of man back to the state we were in prior to the fall man our life spans are once again increasing.

just a thought.

 

[dingodile]

It’s not clear that actual lifespan has changed in many thousands of years. What has changes is what kills us, and how long it takes.

It’s well known to paleoanthropologists that when humanity took up agriculture, it took a major hit, in terms of health. That’s when the “diseases of civilization” began to become obvious. Prior to agriculture, and for most of the time humans have existed, they lived as hunter-gatherers. They were taller, had excellent bone density, and by all indications enjoyed excellent health.

After agriculture, people lived in much larger groups, with dubious hygiene practices. This made it easier for diseases to spread. In addition, the grain-based agricultural diet was (and is) less healthy than the hunter-gatherer diet to which we were adapted by hundreds of thousands of years of exposure.

Hunter-gatherers, however, were killed by predators, trauma, exposure, and each other. There life expectancy, not lifespan, was shorter due to these factors. They died young, but not because they grew old faster. Agriculturalists were less healthy but lived longer because they were less endangered by predators, exposure, and trauma–although violence remained a significant cause of death, as it still is. They died older, but not because they were healthier or had a longer lifespan.

 

[Xuan]

My personal opinion about the long life-spans in the Bible is this:

Before there was written language, people used to memorize information and pass it along by word of mouth. After a while, the genealogies became quite long and extremely difficult to remember. As people were passing along these genealogies, they would naturally forget some of the names. But they knew that a long time had to be accounted for, so they would simply increase the life-spans of those names they remembered.

Xuan

 

[Incomplete]

I know catholics are not literalists - except perhaps for the parts concerning the eucharist - but I do know at least one person in real life who does believe we lived to be hundreds of years old, as it says, and as time goes on we live shorter and shorter lives due to the effect of sin. The exact opposite is the case as we know from the historical records.

Sarah x

I don’t know anybody who believes that. I’m guessing that you won’t get answers from many who do because it’s not a common belief.

Then again, I could be wrong. I’m following this with interest to see if there are more than I think.

 

[Incomplete]

My personal opinion about the long life-spans in the Bible is this:

Before there was written language, people used to memorize information and pass it along by word of mouth. After a while, the genealogies became quite long and extremely difficult to remember. As people were passing along these genealogies, they would naturally forget some of the names. But they knew that a long time had to be accounted for, so they would simply increase the life-spans of those names they remembered.

Xuan

Sometimes a number can be used that’s not meant to be literal but to just indicate the person lived a long life.

 

[SteveVH]

Probably not for catholics but those that take a more literal view of the Bible … I was talking with a girlfriend not so long ago and she used the expression as old as Mathuzela (Spelling!). It got me thinking … some people of faith who literally believe the bible believe we are corupted by sin, and those living closest to the time of Adam, lived very long lives as per the Bible, and our lives shorten as we get further away from that point in time due to the effects of the corruption of sin.

So how do you explain then we are in fact living longer … and those born a few hunded years ago that we have birth and death details for, would have been living for well over a hundred years routinely, and we know that is simply not the case.

Where as today, we are finding more and more people living to be well into their 90’s and 100’s.

Sarah x

Ascribing a great number of years to one’s life in the Old Testament was a symbol of importance or stature of that person and has nothing to do with the actual number of years one lived. Your argument would be valid as to those who do take a literal view of this but invalid as to the truth the author was intending.

 

[Incomplete]

Ascribing a great number of years to one’s life in the Old Testament was a symbol of importance or stature of that person and has nothing to do with the actual number of years one lived. Your argument would be valid as to those who do take a literal view of this but invalid as to the truth the author was intending.

You’ve taught me something new, something I probably should’ve known but didn’t. Thank you.

 

[CopticChristian]

Probably not for catholics but those that take a more literal view of the Bible … I was talking with a girlfriend not so long ago and she used the expression as old as Mathuzela (Spelling!). It got me thinking … some people of faith who literally believe the bible believe we are corupted by sin, and those living closest to the time of Adam, lived very long lives as per the Bible, and our lives shorten as we get further away from that point in time due to the effects of the corruption of sin.

So how do you explain then we are in fact living longer … and those born a few hunded years ago that we have birth and death details for, would have been living for well over a hundred years routinely, and we know that is simply not the case.

Where as today, we are finding more and more people living to be well into their 90’s and 100’s.

Sarah x

You should look into the notion that age is age. The age of those that lived for long time as I understand it has to do with people being given rewards for things done. Instead of a medal or a ribbon they were given years to their age as reward. Someone I am sure can elaborate on this.

 

[SteveVH]

You’ve taught me something new, something I probably should’ve known but didn’t. Thank you.

Don’t feel bad. I didn’t know this until just about a year ago, myself. It was explained to me by Dr. Tim Gray, one the best new theologians in our Church. I am fortunate that his parents are members of our parish and he comes to visit quite often. He understands not only the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek languages, but also the various genres of writing used at that time and in that culture. What a blessing.

 

[meltzerboy]

Probably not for catholics but those that take a more literal view of the Bible … I was talking with a girlfriend not so long ago and she used the expression as old as Mathuzela (Spelling!). It got me thinking … some people of faith who literally believe the bible believe we are corupted by sin, and those living closest to the time of Adam, lived very long lives as per the Bible, and our lives shorten as we get further away from that point in time due to the effects of the corruption of sin.

So how do you explain then we are in fact living longer … and those born a few hunded years ago that we have birth and death details for, would have been living for well over a hundred years routinely, and we know that is simply not the case.

Where as today, we are finding more and more people living to be well into their 90’s and 100’s.

Sarah x

The Jewish perspective is that Adam and Eve did NOT bring death into the world. They were created mortal and died due to their mortal nature. They, as well as the animals in the Garden of Eden, were instructed to be fruitful and multiply as part of their biological nature and so that they might be replaced by their offspring. They were instructed not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge and disobeyed G-d. Therefore they were thrown out of the Garden of Eden before they ate of the Tree of LIfe and became immortal. The Tree of Knowledge has been interpreted by Nachmanides as the Tree of Desire, based on the Hebrew text. Before Adam and Eve ate of this tree, they had no desire to live forever; but after eating of it, they were tempted toward immortality. Judaism does not believe they are the source of original sin; in fact, the concept of original sin is foreign to Judaism. We do not inherit the sin of Adam and Eve: we sin and are capable of redemption only by means of our individual free will, given to us by G-d for the purpose of drawing closer to Him.

 

[atheistgirl]

I don’t know anybody who believes that. I’m guessing that you won’t get answers from many who do because it’s not a common belief.

Then again, I could be wrong. I’m following this with interest to see if there are more than I think.

The person in real life that I know that believes this belongs to a christian group called the Jehovah Witnesses.

 

[atheistgirl]

Ascribing a great number of years to one’s life in the Old Testament was a symbol of importance or stature of that person and has nothing to do with the actual number of years one lived. Your argument would be valid as to those who do take a literal view of this but invalid as to the truth the author was intending.

Exactly, it’s a ‘‘convention’’ - out of interest, would you have any reference or source material for this I could read up on.

Sarah x