creationist
1,008
edits
Antediluvian world: Difference between revisions
From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
Jump to navigationJump to search
→Longevity
m (→Longevity) |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
== Longevity == | == Longevity == | ||
John Sanford in [[Genetic Entropy]] points out the decline in ages from the oldest human (Methuselah) and the other long ages for humans (Adam, 930 years, Noah 960 years) down to Abraham (170 years) and declining further. He notes that this decline follows an exponential decay curve and is off-tolerance of this curve by mere fractions of a percentage point. This means that the writer(s) of Genesis were either well-aware of advanced mathematics or were just reporting what-they-knew. There would be no compelling reason to display an exponential curve in the numbers since genetics was not discovered until the 19th century and the human genome was not understood until the 20th century. How could humans live much longer? The original human genome, as provided by the Creator, was free of the generational mutations that led to the decay curve. In addition, it is postulated by creationists that the dietary and environmental conditions were more conducive to longevity. | John Sanford in [[Genetic Entropy]] points out the decline in ages from the oldest human (Methuselah) and the other long ages for humans (Adam, 930 years, Noah 960 years) down to Abraham (170 years) and declining further to Moses (120 years). He notes that this decline follows an exponential decay curve and is off-tolerance of this curve by mere fractions of a percentage point. This means that the writer(s) of Genesis were either well-aware of advanced mathematics or were just reporting what-they-knew. There would be no compelling reason to display an exponential curve in the numbers since genetics was not discovered until the 19th century and the human genome was not understood until the 20th century. How could humans live much longer? The original human genome, as provided by the Creator, was free of the generational mutations that led to the decay curve. In addition, it is postulated by creationists that the dietary and environmental conditions were more conducive to longevity. | ||
Culturally speaking, it is hard to imagine someone living prosperously beyond a finite timeframe of 100 years or more. In the present-day experience, people who live over 100 years are hardly in a position to mount armies, challenge potentates or vigorously regenerate a bloodline. The three sons of Noah entered the Ark ostensibly at 100 years of age and clearly had no qualms about mastering the seas or replenishing the Earth with children after the Ark landed. | |||
Concerning the spread of evil however, of note is someone like Adolf Hitler, who arguably had hit a pinnacle of evil intentions by age 20. In present-day terms, he would have some 40 years to make-it-or-break-it before seriously considering his own mortality and ultimate replacement. But if he could have lived for 100's of years, building armies of disciples over time, then mounting a war against the world might be ambitious in his thirties. But if he failed and went into hiding for 100 years before trying again, perhaps he would be more successful on a second attempt. What of a third, or fourth, each likewise 100 years apart? Clearly the longevity of mankind was as much a liability as a blessing. | |||
=== Months Not Years? === | |||
Some skeptics<ref>http://www.inplainsite.org/html/methusela_lived_how_long_.html</ref> in an effort to assist in the "un-believability" of such high longevity, have offered the notion that the "years" of Genesis were not common years as we understand them (one Earth revolution around the Sun) but were lunar years (one Moon revolution around the Earth). This would mean that Eve gave birth to Seth at "age 130", but this would mean roughly ten years old. They would say "sure, that's young, but they had good genes and all that." | |||
But does this notion play out with even a superficial reading of the accounts? In {{Bible ref|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=14}} the author notes day and night, days and years in context and contrast, clearly delineating their meaning. In {{Bible ref|book=Genesis|chap=4|verses=1}} we begin the tragic story of Cain and Abel, grown men with their own concerns making sacrifice to the Lord. And only after do we read in {{Bible ref|book=Genesis|chap=4|verses=25}} that Seth was born to Adam and Eve when they were 130 years old. Here's the problem: If Eve was only 10 "actual" years old when she gave birth to Seth, where did she find time to give birth to and raise Cain and Abel into grown men? Later in {{Bible ref|book=Genesis|chap=7|verses=11}} we engage a very meticulous account of the Flood days and the time in the Ark, but it launches in the 600th year of Noah, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month. Clearly the context fully conveys an understanding of the hierarchical and chronological relationship of years, months and days. | |||
Such skeptics oddly do not enter these thought experiments to make the Bible "more believable". Rather they offer these notions in fully skeptical form. It is as if they want to manufacture a reason to believe the Bible even less than they already do. | |||
== Language == | == Language == | ||
