Why did Man lose over 90% of his life spand after the greate Flood

The Bible says that he had to take with him Seven of every kind of Clean animals, A male and its Mate and Two of every kind of unclean animals, a male and its mate..

Just for clarification....seven pairs of clean/birds and two pairs of unclean.

God put the tree in the Garden to see if Adam would take the advise of another over what God had told him, and sure enough he Did and we have been doing it ever since..

Chapter and verse where G-d is shown setting them up. Thanks!

Originally posted by Shonet1430

The Bible says that he had to take with him Seven of every kind of Clean animals, A male and its Mate and Two of every kind of unclean animals, a male and its mate..

Just for clarification....seven pairs of clean/birds and two pairs of unclean.

Yes, Thats what it says,, Seven pairs of each of the clean/ Birds, and Only two pairs of all the unclean...

Originally posted by Shonet1430

God put the tree in the Garden to see if Adam would take the advise of another over what God had told him, and sure enough he Did and we have been doing it ever since..

Chapter and verse where G-d is shown setting them up. Thanks!

oh, Thats the only thing my small brain can come up with, after all thats how things turned out....

Originally posted by Shonet1430This is an easy one. G-d didn't give man the calendar until Exodus 12. Before that time period was G-d's calendar and G-d only knows how many months, days, years, second, minutes, hours, etc that consisted of. That would be why also that evolution does not conflict with the story of creation. We don't know what G-d's six days were.

Let us examine this from a Biblical perspective

This is an easy one. G-d didn't give man the calendar until Exodus 12.

I agree, somewhat, where your statement means that the years before Exodus 12 cannot be determined, yet this in Hebraic calendrical terms, is the year 5765. An irreconcilable number, but one which nevertheless is accepted as dating to genesis 1:1, hence this statement

That would be why also that evolution does not conflict with the story of creation. We don't know what G-d's six days were.

Is at odds with the train of thought which states we are only a mere 6,000 years old versus that determined by the theory of evolution.

Eve didn't eat from the tree of life but from the tree of knowledge. Had she eaten from the tree of life, they would have been eternal like G-d. There were two distinct trees. G-d had cherubs watch the tree of life while Adam and Eve were leaving so that they did not partake of that tree.

This does not stand up to reason, since, the purpose per Gen 3:3 was to ensure that man could not avail himself of the ability of finding everlasting life. Whereas, 3 chapters later, God still had to institute a limited life term for man, and so enhance his approach by removing the first couple from the garden. In other words, if he had already removed the ability for man to become immortal, he not only planted same for their purpose, but had to find a secondary plan to ensure we died.

What a vindictive and malicious God was this Amun/Ra/Aten to tempt innocents so.

Originally posted by Shonet1430Just for clarification....seven pairs of clean/birds and two pairs of unclean.

Perhaps your Biblical account speaks of birds only, although I know otherwise. Now Noah, his wife, his sons and their wives lived on this ark for a better part of a year. What did they use for sustenence?

Originally posted by jfdarby
I would like to get some input into what happen to man after the great flood that would make man lose over 90% of his life spand..

Before the flood, Man seam to live over 900 years, But now it's something great if you make it over 100 Years..

You Guys and Gals that's is heavy Science should have some great ideals on what happen to Man and the Earth During the Flood....

perhaps because we fell into the dominion of another, i know it does say that we are in the dominion of another (other than GOD).

i suppose the other one had different plans for us, seeing he obviously didn't agree with the original plans.

so perhaps it was in his/her/its best interest to make mortality a learned trait.

remember, you are talking about a time after we chose to leave paradise, and outside paradise perhaps another has dominion.

did they truly live longer?

i fail to see how documentation could exist for thousands of years and not be guarded by someone to ensure its survival. Remember if man lives for a maximum of only 120 years, then you are still talking about 58 generations since the first recorded written languages currently known to the general public.

oh, Thats the only thing my small brain can come up with, after all thats how things turned out....

Could be but I don't think G-d was testing him. But that's just my opinion. There is no original sin in Judaism.

Perhaps your Biblical account speaks of birds only, although I know otherwise. Now Noah, his wife, his sons and their wives lived on this ark for a better part of a year. What did they use for sustenence?

Perhaps your brain didn't process what I wrote. Let's try this again. Just for clarification....seven pairs of clean/birds and two pairs of unclean. For whatever reason, you didn't seem to pick up on the "/" which says in a shorter way seven pairs of clean animals and seven pairs of birds.

I agree, somewhat, where your statement means that the years before Exodus 12 cannot be determined, yet this in Hebraic calendrical terms, is the year 5765. An irreconcilable number, but one which nevertheless is accepted as dating to genesis 1:1, hence this statement

This is in fact the year 5765. The number was derived from counting back to the creation of the neshama which is the soul of man. The numbers prior to the onset of the calendar in Exodus 12 was concluded by counting the generations of man. Examining from a Biblical perspective, there are two "sets" so to speak as in the speech of Moses given in Deuteronomy 32.7 where he's talking about seeing the fingerprint of G-d in the universe "consider the days of old, the years of the many generations." He splits it into the days of old which are the days before man and then the many generations which was the counting forward of the many generations that came after.

Is at odds with the train of thought which states we are only a mere 6,000 years old versus that determined by the theory of evolution.

As shown above, it's truly not at odds. Even the Big Bang is accepted by the Jews because it too does not clash with the idea in the Torah.

This does not stand up to reason, since, the purpose per Gen 3:3 was to ensure that man could not avail himself of the ability of finding everlasting life. Whereas, 3 chapters later, God still had to institute a limited life term for man, and so enhance his approach by removing the first couple from the garden. In other words, if he had already removed the ability for man to become immortal, he not only planted same for their purpose, but had to find a secondary plan to ensure we died.

What a vindictive and malicious God was this Amun/Ra/Aten to tempt innocents so.

First of all, man had limited life to begin with. The story shows that both trees were available. G-d had given man the ability to eat from the tree of life first. Man did not choose to do so. He told man to eat from any tree BUT the tree of knowledge so man could have eaten from every other tree and eventually would have gotten to eternal life. Also if man had eaten from the tree of knowledge, he would have been godlike all the way around. Man was already made in his image but lacked the eternal all knowing qualities. So when G-d cast them out, he had the tree blocked so that man would no longer have the possibility. If man was not limited with life to begin with, it doesn't make much sense to have a tree that provides it. See verse 22 of the same chapter.

Originally posted by Shonet1430
[Perhaps your brain didn't process what I wrote. Let's try this again. Just for clarification....seven pairs of clean/birds and two pairs of unclean. For whatever reason, you didn't seem to pick up on the "/" which says in a shorter way seven pairs of clean animals and seven pairs of birds.

Okay, how about I grant you that my brain was malfunctioning, since I would not want to rob you of any attempt to detour the crux of the conversation, and so I provide the running dialogue for your clarification.

Firstly, you utilize the term 'birds,' which, with you being a new Jewess and all, you should understand that the term clean, means that which is food for human consumption. Hence you suggest that Noah and his crew ate only birds for sustenance.

Secondly, JFdarby wrote:- The Bible says that he had to take with him Seven of every kind of Clean animals, A male and its Mate and Two of every kind of unclean animals, a male and its mate..

To which you responded: Just for clarification....seven pairs of clean/birds and two pairs of unclean. which is when I asked: Perhaps your Biblical account speaks of birds only, although I know otherwise. Now Noah, his wife, his sons and their wives lived on this ark for a better part of a year. What did they use for sustenance?

Thirdly, now perhaps to you birds mean all animals, and you would even have the backing of some evolutionist scientists who think birds played an integral part in our evolution. But as you can see above, you made no mention whatsoever of any animal other than birds, where the virgule as used by you is not correct since you attempt to copulate an adjective with a noun, where when applied correctly, it should be like comparatives. That leaves you open to stating that ‘/’ could even mean slugs.

Fourthly, you have not answered my question.

Fifthly, Gen. 6:19 states that Noah was to take two of every living thing, which is contrary to Gen.7:2 which required seven of every “clean” beast, the latter also being contrary to Gen.7:15. The two demands and one record, do not reconcile, for it was either two, or seven of some, where the “clean” directive was not known until much after Noah.

Sixthly, we have the gestation period of many mammals, which for the goat is 5 months and the cow, 9 months. Along with that, we have restrictions on the number of birds which cannot be eaten. Therefore, Moses and his crew were locked up in this boat for 300 days, can you tell us of what their diet consisted so that it did not interfere with the natural procreation thereafter? After all, if he ate even one bovine, we have an issue with offspring, one enough to not continue the species unless of course Nessie was already pregnant and was mated to her offspring.

ME- yet this in Hebraic calendrical terms, is the year 5765.

well at least we agree on one thing, the Hebraic calendrical year

you This is in fact the year 5765.

Do I care for the lesson on how it was derived, since I knew said date? No! Aside from the unnecessary history lesson, and despite your vehemence, the years prior to Genesis 12 cannot be determined since in simplistic terms, god created man in Gen.1:27, and then again in 2:7, another un-reconcilable event. Further along we have the non-aged event between the death of Joseph and the rise of Moses. Then, were one to add the Biblical account, one does not come to a total of 5,765. If you can, then be my guest and detail same. Finally, to quote you

We don't know what G-d's six days were.

I would prefer some semblance of consistency in your argument, or I lose interest. So which is it then? “we don’t know what God’s six days were,” or “The numbers prior to the onset of the calendar in Exodus 12 was concluded by counting the generations of man.”

First of all, man had limited life to begin with.

You agree with me, so your point of contention is?


[edit on 6/21/05 by SomewhereinBetween]