Growing old

[atheistgirl]

Oh, I almost forgot - thanks to all for your contribution and thoughts so far - very interesting some of them.

Sarah x

 

[Contarini]

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!

Life expectancy, not life span. This doesn’t affect your point, but it’s one of my pet peeves. Life span has lengthened a bit–fifty-year-old people were considered old in ancient times and for that matter in the sixteenth century–but life expectancy has changed far more drastically.

I don’t take the long lifespans of characters in Genesis as literal, myself, for the reason you give.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

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.

Now there’s a blast from the past. Tim is the first person who seriously tried to convert me to Catholicism. He nearly succeeded before my parents’ objections and my natural hesitancy and skepticism kicked in, and I’ve been hovering on the brink ever since (about 15 years).

I learned a lot from him too. He was a master’s student at Duke when I first went there, along with Matthew Levering and Michael Dauphinais, two other very bright young Catholic theologians. The four of us used to hang out quite a bit.

Edwin

 

[SteveVH]

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

Not at hand. I will contact Dr. Gray and see what I can come up with. I received this information in a Bible Study I was attending in which we were using Dr. Gray’s materials. It was just a question that arose when he came to visit us and that is the answer he gave.

As far as his credentials, he is the current president of the Augustine Institute, professor of Sacred Scripture at the St. John Vianney Theological Seminary and executive director of the Denver Catholic Biblical and Catechetical Schools. He has a PhD in biblical studies from Catholic University of America. So I think he is more than qualified, but let me see what I can get my hands on.

 

[SteveVH]

Now there’s a blast from the past. Tim is the first person who seriously tried to convert me to Catholicism. He nearly succeeded before my parents’ objections and my natural hesitancy and skepticism kicked in, and I’ve been hovering on the brink ever since (about 15 years).

I learned a lot from him too. He was a master’s student at Duke when I first went there, along with Matthew Levering and Michael Dauphinais, two other very bright young Catholic theologians. The four of us used to hang out quite a bit.

Edwin

Wow! I’ll let him know we’ve run into each other next time I see him. Small world. You might want to pick up his series called “The Great Adventure” which he co-authored with Jeff Cavins. It is an incredible bible study, not just for Catholics. He has written a new book called “Walking with God” which is pretty much a summary of his previous work. I would highly recommend it.

 

[Warrenton]

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

I happen to believe that the ages provided in Genesis are accurate.

I expect they lived that long because the earth was much cleaner, and they lived lives that were attuned to the world we were created to live in.

As the world became polluted, and as people crowded together and engaged in more and more vile conduct, disease increased. By 1900, the British Army had reduced its height requirement to 5’ because men were so stunted by malnutrition and disease. That is almost a foot less than their ancestors of 1000 years earlier.

We have alleviated some of the worst problems of overcrowding and poor nutrition and diseases that spread through those evils (at least in our neck of the woods - it’s getting worse in southern Sudan and Somolia), but from the Catholic perspective, if you were to average in the ages of the aborted, the average span would probably be seen to be holding steady. The average of the age of a fetus killed at 3 months and a person living to 100 is still about 50. Hardly an average of biblical proportions. My guess is there are a lot more people dying in the first or second trimester than are living to 100.

Sorry to cast a pall on the scientific love fest, but, heck, your in Catholic country, right?

 

[Incomplete]

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

I didn’t know they believed that (obviously). You might get more response if somewhere in the title you made it clear, because at least the Jehovah’s Witnesses who were interested would know to look in this thread.

 

[Warrenton]

The exact opposite is the case as we know from the historical records. Sarah x

Just a quick observation - if any people from Genesis have been dug up, obviously the paleontologists would say “this person was 40” or something like that, right? That is because the people in Genesis were like 40 year olds now, when they were 80.

The point of the stories is not that people tottered around for 150 years in an advanced state of decrepitude, like some bizarre version of south Florida.

 

[atheistgirl]

Life expectancy, not life span. This doesn’t affect your point, but it’s one of my pet peeves.

Duely noted with apologies and thanks.

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

Not at hand. I will contact Dr. Gray and see what I can come up with. I received this information in a Bible Study I was attending in which we were using Dr. Gray’s materials. It was just a question that arose when he came to visit us and that is the answer he gave.

As far as his credentials, he is the current president of the Augustine Institute, professor of Sacred Scripture at the St. John Vianney Theological Seminary and executive director of the Denver Catholic Biblical and Catechetical Schools. He has a PhD in biblical studies from Catholic University of America. So I think he is more than qualified, but let me see what I can get my hands on.

Much appreciated. I think this is where a well run forum with great people comes into it’s own. Little ol me asks a question, and suddenly there are people that know people that have forgotten more than I would ever learn in 10 lifetimes, who are happy to seek out the answer for you.

Awesome.

Sarah x

 

[Eric_Hyom]

If God can create the universe and life, he should also have the power to govern how long people live, so I do not see any problem with Adam living to 930 years. I believe old age is in the hands of God, if God wanted us to live to a thousand years old today then we would.

But would we learn and become better or worse; with extended old age?

Life on this Earth is almost irrelevant, we hope and pray for an eternal good life after death, with our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Warrenton]

I don’t take the long lifespans of characters in Genesis as literal, myself, for the reason you give.

Edwin

If not mistaken, the Bible speaks in terms of span. Psalm 90?

 

[Warrior1979]

I happen to believe that the ages provided in Genesis are accurate.

I expect they lived that long because the earth was much cleaner, and they lived lives that were attuned to the world we were created to live in.

As the world became polluted, and as people crowded together and engaged in more and more vile conduct, disease increased. By 1900, the British Army had reduced its height requirement to 5’ because men were so stunted by malnutrition and disease. That is almost a foot less than their ancestors of 1000 years earlier.

We have alleviated some of the worst problems of overcrowding and poor nutrition and diseases that spread through those evils (at least in our neck of the woods - it’s getting worse in southern Sudan and Somolia), but from the Catholic perspective, if you were to average in the ages of the aborted, the average span would probably be seen to be holding steady. The average of the age of a fetus killed at 3 months and a person living to 100 is still about 50. Hardly an average of biblical proportions. My guess is there are a lot more people dying in the first or second trimester than are living to 100.

Sorry to cast a pall on the scientific love fest, but, heck, your in Catholic country, right?

The issue with age limits I addressed earlier. Nutrition, clean environment, etc. cannot push the human body beyond it’s biological limit to exist. If people really were living to be a few hundred years old, their DNA would have to be different, and evidence of this DNA should have been found.

 

[Warrenton]

The issue with age limits I addressed earlier. Nutrition, clean environment, etc. cannot push the human body beyond it’s biological limit to exist. If people really were living to be a few hundred years old, their DNA would have to be different, and evidence of this DNA should have been found.

Shocking as this may be, is it possible that the limit is not what we presently theorize?

Scientists have a frustrating tendency to revise their conclusions more or less continuously.

It is also possible that under the different conditions prevailing at that time, the aging process was different.

 

[Warrenton]

evidence of this DNA should have been found.

The tradition says that Adam was buried under Mount Calvary. Perhaps that would be a good place to start looking?

 

[Warrior1979]

Shocking as this may be, is it possible that the limit is not what we presently theorize?

It would be shocking, since we have billions upon billions of observable examples that our current estimates are right, and not a single example it is wrong. This even includes primitive cultures living in pristine, natural environments.

Scientists have a frustrating tendency to revise their conclusions more or less continuously.

Science is simply a description of the world around us. As it relates to this particular matter, it is unlikely that a major revisions in theory will take place. This is because all data points to one conclusion, and none to the contrary.

It is also possible that under the different conditions prevailing at that time, the aging process was different.

Not with our DNA. If it was different, a significant mutation in our DNA occurred.

 

[Warrior1979]

The tradition says that Adam was buried under Mount Calvary. Perhaps that would be a good place to start looking?

You don’t have to start with Adam. Any body in the time frame in question will do.

 

[Warrenton]

This even includes primitive cultures living in pristine, natural environments.

Primitive does not equal pristine.

The reason primitive cultures continue to exist anywhere is because the environment is so hostile that no one else wants to live there.

Science is simply a description of the world around us. As it relates to this particular matter, it is unlikely that a major revisions in theory will take place. This is because all data points to one conclusion, and none to the contrary.

Actually, data points to nothing. It just exists. A hypothesis is set out, and the data is analyzed to see if it can be interpreted consistently with the hypothesis.

In the case of growing old, since it is impossible at present to go back in time, certain assumptions are made regarding the environment, the process of aging and the like. The assumptions are more or less based on the present conditions, since that is where the billions and billions of examples are drawn from. I would note, the studies are probably not based on billions of examples, since integrating that much information would be difficult.

However, if any of the underlying assumptions is wrong, then the possibility exists that another explanation may be correct.

Not with our DNA. If it was different, a significant mutation in our DNA occurred.

This is speculation. And as we discussed, since you do not have any DNA from the people mentioned in the Bible, you are forced to speculate on what their DNA was like.

 

[Contarini]

If not mistaken, the Bible speaks in terms of span. Psalm 90?

I’m not sure where you’re going with this. Psalm 90 gives a lifespan of 70-80 years, making the point I made in another post that the short life expectancy of the ancient world should not be confused with lifespan. Genesis 6 speaks of humankind’s “days” being 120, which could be taken as a shortening of the earlier long lifespans but still longer than those of the writer’s own time; or it could be taken as the time between when God said this and the Flood; or it could be taken as the maximum lifespan of humanity from that point on (it’s essentially the maximum lifespan today). Isaiah 65 speaks of an ideal world in which 100 is considered young and someone who doesn’t live that long is seen as cursed.

So by and large, with the exception of ancient patriarchs (down to and including Moses), the Bible seems to assume a lifespan fairly similar to ours.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

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

I think any standard scholarly commentary on Genesis would have something to say about this. I find the Word and Anchor series to be good examples of solid, moderate Biblical scholarship (Word tends to be moderate to conservative Protestant; Anchor has a lot of Catholic scholars and is a bit less conservative). The Interpretation series is also good–I believe that their Genesis volume is by Walter Brueggeman, who is a very eminent Protestant Biblical scholar.